E 
-407 

G-3 


UC-NRLF 


3 

LO 
O 

in 

O 


PEACE 


WITH 


MEXICO 


BY 


ALBERT    GALLATIN. 


* 

OF   TV 


BARTLETT  &   WELFORD: 
NO.  1  ASTOR  HOUSE,  NEW  YORK. 

1847. 


BOOKS  AT  VERY  REDUCED  PRIC 


ENGLISH    EDITIONS 

OF 

NEW     AND     VALUABLE      WORKS 

FOR  SALE  BY 

BARTLETT    &    WELFORD, 

7    ASTOR    HOUSE,    NEW    YORK, 


AINS  WORTH'S  Travels  and  Researches  in  Asia 
Minor,  Mesopotamia,  Chaldea,  and  Armenia. 
Maps  and  Plates.  2  vols.  bvo.  $2  50. 

AMERICA  AND  THE  WEST  INDIES.  By 
Prof.  Long,  Porter,  and  Tucker.  (Library  of 
Useful  Knowledge.)  Large  Svo.  $1  75. 

ARCHAEOLOGICAL  ALBUM ;  or,  Museum  of 
National  Antiquities.  22  Plates  of  Antiquities, 
and  6  splendid  illuminations.  Post  4to.  cloth. 

~~$3  75. 

BARROW'S  Travels  in  China;  containing  De 
scriptions,  Observations,  and  Comparisons, 
made  and  collected  in  a  Tour  from  Pekin  to 
Canton,  and  a  Residence  there.  Plates.  4to. 
cloth.  $4  50. 

BERNAL  DIAZ,  Memoirs  of. — Written  by  him 
self;  containing  a  full  and  true  Account  of  the 
Discovery  and  Conquest  of  Mexico  and  New 
Spain.  Translated  by  J.  L.  Lockhart.  2  vols. 
Svo.  cloth.  $3  50. 

BRITISH  HUSBANDRY— Exhibiting  the 
Farming  Practice  in  the  various  parts  of  the 
United  Kingdom.  3  vols.  Svo.  cloth.  $1  50. 

BLANC'S  (Louis)  History  of  Ten  Years,  1S30— 
1840.  Maps,  &o.  2  thick  vols.  Svo,  cloth. 
$5  50. 

BROWNE'S  (Sir  Thomas)  Works;  including 
his  Life  and  Correspondence.  Edited  by  Si 
mon  Wilkin.  4  vols.  Svo.  cloth.  $10. 

BROUGHAM'S  POLITICAL  PHILOSOPHY. 
Containing  the  Principles  of  Government; 
Monarchical  Government ;  Aristocracy  ;  Aris 
tocratic  Government ;  Democracy  ;  Mixed 
Monarchy.  3  vols.  Svo.  cloth.  $6  50. 

CARY'S  Memorials  of  the  Great  Civil  War  in 
England,  from  1646  to  1652.  Edited  from 
Original  Letters  in  the  Bodleian  Library.  3 
vols.  Svo.  cloth.  $3  50. 

CATTERMOLE'S  Literature  of  the  Church  of 
England,  indicated  in  Selections  from  the 
Writings  of  Eminent_Divines,  with  Memoirs 
of  their  Lives,  &c.  2  vols.  Svo.  cloth.  $3  50. 

CHANDLER'S  Travels  in  Asia  Minor  and 
Greece  ;  and  an  Account  of  a  Tour  made  at 
the  Expense  of  the  Society  of  Dilettanti.  4to. 
cloth.  $3  50. 

CLARKE'S  Travels'"^  various  Countries  of  Eu 
rope,  Asia,  and  Africa.  Maps  and  Plates.  11 
vols.  Svo.  $20. 

CLARENDON  (Earl  of.)— Life  and  Adminis 
tration  of.  With  Original  Correspondence,  &c. 
Edited  by  J.  H,  Lister.  Portrait.  3  vols.  Svo. 
cloth.  $6  50. 

CUDWORTH  (Ralph.)— The  True  Intellectual 
System  of  the  Universe.  3  vols.  Svo.  $6. 

DAVY  (Sir  Humphrey.)— Collected  Works, 
edited  by  his  Brother,  J.  Davy;  with  Memoir 
of  his  Life.  9  vols.  Svo.  cloth.  $13  50. 

DAVY'S  Researches,  Physiological  and  Anatom 
ical.  2  vols.  Svo.  cloth.  $350. 


DE  LOLME  on  the  Rise  and  Progress  of  the 
English  Constitution.  With  an  Introduction 
and  Notes  by  A.  J.  Stephens.  2  vols.  Svo 
cloth.  $350." 

DON  QUIXOTE.— Beautifully  illustrated  by 
Tony  Johannot.  3  vols.  large  Svo,  cloth.  $S.  * 

DON  (George.) — A  General  History  of  the 
chlaurydeous    Plants,     comprising  complete 
Descriptions  of  the  Different  Orders.     4  vols. 
4to.  $10. 

DUNLOP'S  Memoirs  of  Spain  during  the  Reign 
of  Philip  IV.  and  Charles  II.  1621-1700/2 
vols.  Svo.  cloth.  $3  50. 

DUMAS'  Count  of  Monte  Christo.  Illustrated 
with  20  engravings  from  designs  by  M.  Valen 
tine,  2  vols.  Svo.  cloth.  $3  50. 

EASTERN  Europe  and  the  Emperor  Nicholas, 
By  the  Author  of  "  Revelations  of  Russia."  ?, 
vols.  post  Svo.  cloth.  $3  50. 

EUGENE  SUE'S  Wandering  Jew.  Splendid 
Pictorial  Edition,  with  104  illustrations,  beau 
tifully  engraved  on  wood.  Best  Library  Edi 
tion.  3  vols.  royal  Svo.  $6  50. 

EUGENE  SUE'S  Pauli  Monti;  or,  the  Hotel 
Lambert.  Illustrated  with  Engravings  by 
Jules  David.  Svo.  cloth.  $1  50. 

EUGENE  SUE'S  Mysteries  of  Paris.— New  and 
splendid  Pictorial  Edition,  with  upwards  of 
700  Engravings  on  Wood.  3  vols.  imperial 
Svo.  cloth  gilt.  $7. 

FOSTER  (T.  C.)— Letters  on  the  Condition  oi 
the  People  of  Ireland  ;  Reprinted,  with  Addi 
tions  and  Copious  Notes,  from  the  Time 
Newspaper.  Map.  2d  Edition.  Thick  Svo 
cloth.  $250. 

GIBBON'S  Miscellaneous  Works ;  with  Me 
moirs  of  his  Life  and  Writings,  &c.  By  Lore- 
Sheffield.  Thick  Svo.  cloth.  $2  35. 

GILLIES'  HISTORY  OF  ANCIENT  GREECE 
Its  Colonies  and  Conquests  from  the  Earlier 
Accounts,  including  the  History  of  Literature 
Philosophy,  and  the  Fine    Arts.  4  vols.  Svo 
cloth.  $11. 

GOLOWNIN'S  Memoirs  of  a  Captivity  in  Japa.i 
in  181 1,  '12,  and  '13.  3  vols.  Svo.  cloth.  $2  ",', 

GOLDSMITH  (Oliver.)— The  Life  of,  i 
variety  of  Original  Sources.  By  James 
Portrait.  2  vols.  Svo.  cloth.  $4. 

GORDON    (Thomas.)— History    of    the 
Revolution,  and  of  the  Wars   and  Cam 
arising  from  the  Struggle  of  the  Greek 
ots  in    emancipating  their  Country  irr 
Turkish  Yoke.  9  vols.  Svo.  $2-  50. 

IIEEREN'S  Historical  Researches  into  th 
tics.  Intercourse,  and  Trade  of  the  Pr 
Nations  of  Antiquity.  Maps,  <Scc.  ^  ""' 
cloth.  $12  50. 

Manual  of  the  History  of  t 

System   of  Europe    and    its   Col 
cloth.      72?. 


PEACE    WITH    MEXICO 

BY     ALBERT     GALLATIN. 

: 


t  I. —  The  Law  of  Natiom. 

IT  seems  certain  that  Mexico  must  ultimately  submit  to  such  terms  of  peace  as  the 
United  States  shall  dictate.  An  heterogeneous  population  of  seven  millions,  with 
very  limited  resources,  and  no  credit ;  distracted  by  internal  dissensions,  and  by  the 
ambition  of  its  chiefs,  a  prey  by  turns  to  anarchy  and  to  military  usurpers;  occupy 
ing  among  the  nations  of  the  civilized  world,  either  physically  or  mentally,  whether 
in  political  education,  social  state,  or  any  other  respect,  but  an  inferior  position  ; 
cannot  contend  successfully  with  an  eoei^etic,  intelligent,  enlightened  and  united 
nation  of  twenty  millions,  possessed  of  unlimited  resources  and  credit,  and  enjoying 
all  the  benefits  of  a  regular,  strong,  and  free  government.  All  this  was  anticipated  ; 
but  the  extraordinary  successes  of  the  Americans  have  exceeded  the  most  sanguine 
expectations.  All  the  advanced  posts  of  the  enemy,  New  Mexico,  California,  the 
line  of  the  lower  Rio  Norte,  and  all  the  sea  ports,  which  it  was  deemed  necessary  to 
occupy,  have  been  subdued.  And  a  small  force,  apparently  incompetent  to  the  ob 
ject,  has  penetrated  near  three  hundred  miles  into  the  interior,  and  is  now  in  quiet 
possession  of  the  far-famed  metropolis  of  the  Mexican  dominions.  The  superior 
skill  and  talents  of  our  distinguished  generals,  and  the  unparalleled  bravery  of  our 
troops,  have  surmounted  all  obstacles.  By  whomsoever  commanded  on  either  side  ; 
however  strong  the  positions  and  fortifications  of  the  Mexicans,  and  with  a  tremendous 
numerical  superiority,  there  has  not  been  a  single  engagement,  in  which  they  have 
not  been  completely  defeated.  The  most  remarkable  and  unexpected  feature  of  that 
warfare  is,  that  volunteers,  wholly  undisciplined  in  every  sense  of  the  word,  have  vied 
in  devotedness  and  bravery  with  the  regular  •  forces,  and  have  proved  themselves,  in 
every  instance,  superior  in  the  open  field  to  the  best  regular  forces  of  Mexico.  These 
forces  arc  now  annihilated  or  dispersed  ;  and  the  Mexicans  are  reduced  to  a  petty 
warfare  of  guerillas  which,  however  annoying,  cannot  be  productive'of  any  important 
results. 

It  is  true,  that  these  splendid  successes  have  -been  purchased  at  a  price  far  exceed 
ing  their  value.  It  is  true,  that  neither  the  glory  of  these  military  deeds,  nor  the 
ultimate  utility  of  our  conquests,  can  compensate  the  lamentable  loss  of  the  many 
thousand  valuable  lives  sacrificed  in  the  field,  of  the  still  greater  number  who  have 
met  with  an  obscure  death,  or  been  disabled  by  disease  and  fatigue.  It  is  true  that 
their  relatives,  their  parents,  their  wives  and  children,  find  no  consolation,  for  the 
misery  iriflic:ed  upon  them,  in  the  still  greater  losses  experienced  by  the  Mexicans. 
But  if,  disregarding  private  calamities  arid  all  the  evils  of  a  general  nature,  the  neces 
sary  consequences  of  this  war,  we  revert  solely  to  the  relative  position  of  the  two. 
countries,  the  impotence' of  the  Mexicans  and  their  total  inability  to  continue  the 
war,  with  any  appearance  of  success,  arc  still  manifest. 

The  question  then  occurs  :  What  are  the  terms  which  the  United  States  have  a 
right  to  impose  on  Mexico  ?  All  agree  that  it  must  be  an  "  honorable  peace  ;"  but 
the  true  meaning  of  this  word  must  in  the  first  place  be  ascertained. 

The  notion^  that  anything  can  be  truly  honorable  which  is  contrary  to  justice,  will, 
as  an  abstract  proposition,  be  repudiated  by  every  citizen  of  the  United  States.  Will 
any  one  dare  to  assert,  that  a  peace  can  be  honorable,  which  does  not  conform  with 
justice  ? 

There  is  no  difficulty  in  discovering  the  principles  by  which  the  relations  between 
civilized  and  Christian  nations  should  be  regulated,  and  the  reciprocal  duties  which 
they  owe  to  each  other.  Those  principles,  these  duties  have  long  since  been  pro 
claimed  ;  and  the  true  law  of  nations  is  nothing  else  than  the  conformity  to  the  sub 
lime  precepts  of  the  Gospel  morality,  precepts  equally  applicable  to  the  relations 
between  man  and  man,  and  to  the  intercourse  between  nation  and  nation.  "  Thou 
shalt  love  thy  neighbor  as  thyself."  "  I^ove  your  enemies."  "  As  you  would  that 
men  should  do  to  you,  do  ye  also  to  iliein  likewise."  The  sanctity  of  these  com 
mands  is  acknowledged,  without  a  single  exception,  by  every  denomination  of  Chris 
tians,  or  of  men  professing  to  be  such.  The  sceptical  philosopher, admits  and  admires 

iTiuted  by  Edward  O.  Jeukius,  llTNassuu  .Street,  Jf.  Y.  "  .    3 


2 

the  precept.  To  this  holy  rule  we  should  inflexibly  adhere  when  dictating  the  terms 
of  peace.  The  United  States,  though  they  have  the  power,  have  no  right  to  impose 
terms  inconsistent  with  justice.  It  would  be  a  shameful  dereliction  of  principle,  on 
the  part  of  those  who  were  averse  to  the  annexation  of  Texas,  to  countenance  any 
attempt  to  claim  an  acquisition  of  territory,  or  other  advantage,  on  account  of  the 
success  of  our  arms.  X' 

But  in  judging  the  acts  of  our  Government,  it  must  be  admitted  that  statesmen 
think  a  conformity  to  these  usages  which  constitute  the  law  of  nation,  not  as  it 
should  be,  but  as  it  is  practically,  sufficient  to  justify  their  conduct.  And  by  that 
inferior  standard,  those  acts  and  our  duties  in  relation  to  Mexico  will  be  tested. 

II. — Indemnities  to  Citizens  of  the  United  States. 

The  United  States  had,  and  continue  to  have,  an  indubitable  right  to  demand  a  full 
indemnity,  for  any  wrongs  inflicted  on  our  citizens  by  the  Government  of  Mexico,  in 
violation  of  treaties  or  of  the  acknowledged  law  of  nations.  The  negotiations  for  satis 
fying  those  just  demands  had  been  interrupted  by  the  annexation  of  Texas.  When  an 
attempt  was  subsequently  made  to  renew  them,  it  was  therefore  just  and  proper,  that  both 
subjects  should  be  discussed  at  the  same  time  :  and  it  is  now  absolutely  necessary  that 
those  jusf  claims  should  be  fully  provided  for,  in  any  treaty  of  peace  that  may  be  con 
cluded,  and  that  the  payment  should  be  secured  against  any  possible  contingency.  I 
take  it  for  granted  that  no  claims  have  been,  or  shall  be  sustained  by  our  Government, 
but  such  as  are  founded  on  treaties  or  the  acknowledged  law  of  nations. 

Whenever  a  nation  becomes  involved  in  war,  the  manifestoes,  and  every  other  public 
act  issued  for  the  purpose  of  justifying  its  conduct,  always  embrace  every  ground  of 
complaint  which  can  possibly  be  alleged.  But  admitting,  that  the  refusal  to  satisfy 
the  claims  for  indemnity  of  our  citizens  might  have  been  a  just  cause  of  war,  it  is  most 
certain,  that  those  claims  were  not  the  cause  of  that  in  which  we  are  now  involved. 

It  may  be  proper,  in  the  first  place,  to  observe,  that  the  refusal  of  doing  justice,  in 
cases  of  this  kind,  or  the  long  delays  in  providing  for  them,  have  not  generally  produced 
actual  war.  Almost  always  long  protracted  negotiations  have  been  alone  resorted  to. 
This  has  been  strikingly  the  case  with  the  United  States.  The  claims  of  Great  Britain  j 
for  British  debts,  secured  by  the  treaty  of  178-3,  were  not  settled  and  paid  till  the  year  j 
1803  ;  and  it  was  only  subsequent  to  that  year,  that  the  claims  of  the  United  States. 
for  depredations  committed  in  1793,  were  satisfied.  The  very  plain  question  of  slaves, 
carried  away  by  the  British  forces  in  1815,  in  open  violation  of  the  treaty  of  1814,  was* 
not  settled  and  the  indemnity  paid  till  the  year  1826.  The  claims  against  France  for 
depredations,  committed  in  the  years  1806  to  1813,  were  not  settled  and  paid  for  til  i 
the  year  1834.  In  all  those  cases,  peace  was  preserved  by  patience  and  forbearance. 

With  respect  to  the  Mexican  indemnities,  the  subject  had  been  laid  more  than  once 
before  Congress,  not  without  suggestions  that  strong  measures  should  be  resorted  to 
But  Congress,  in  whom  alone  is  vested  the  power  of  declaring  war,  uniformly  declinec 
doing  it.  t 

A  convention  was  entered  into  on  the  llth  April,  1839,  between  the  United  State* 
and  Mexico,  by  virtue  of  which  a  joint  commission  was  appointed  for  the  examinatioi 
and  settlement  of  those  claims.  The  powers  of  the  Commissioners  terminated,  accord 
ing  to  the  convention,  in  February,  1842.  The  total  amount  of  the  American  claims 
presented  to  the  commission,  amounted  to  6,291,605  dollars.  Of  these,  2,026,140 
dollars  were  allowed  by  the  commission  ;  a  further  sum  of  928,628  dollars  was  allowec 
by  the  commissioners  of  the  United  States,  rejected  by  the  Mexican  commissioners 
and  left  undecided  by  the  umpire  ;  and  claims  amounting  to  3,336,837  dollars  had  no 
been  examined. 

A  new  convention,  dated  January  30,  1843,  granted  to  the  Mexicans  a  further  delay ! 
for  the  payment  of  the  claims  which  had  been  admitted,  by  virtue  of  which  the  interes  \ 
due  to  the  claimants  was  made  payable  on  the  30th  April,  1843,  and  the  principal  o  j 
the  awards,  and  the  interest  accruing  thereon,  was  stipulated  to  be  paid  in  five  years  I 
in  "twenty  equal  instalments  every  three  months.     The  claimants  received  the  interes  ] 
due  on  the  30th  April,  1843,  and  the  three  first  instalments.     The  agent  of  the  Unitec 
States  having,  under  peculiar  circumstances,  given  va  receipt  for  the  instalments  due  ii 
April  and  July,  1844,  before  they  had  been  actually  paid  by  Mexico,  the  payment  ha: 
been  assumed  by  the  United  States  and  discharged  to  the  claimants. 


A  thiru  convention  was  concluded  at  Mexico  on  the  20th  November,  1843,  by  the 
Plenipotentiaries  of  the  two  Governm-ents,  by  which  provision  was  made  for  ascertain 
ing  and  paying  the  claims  on  which  no  final  decision  had  been  made.  In  January, 
1844  this  convention  was  ratified  by  the  Senate  of  the  United  States,  with  two  amend 
ments,  which  were  referred  to  the.  Government  of  Mexico,  but  respecting  which  no 
answer  has  ever  been  made.  On  the  12th  of  A.pril,  1814,  a  treaty  was  concluded  by 
the  President  with  Texas,  for  the  annexation  of  that  republic  to  the  United  States. 
This  treaty,  though  not  ratified  by  the  Senate,  placed  the  two  countries  in  a  new  posi 
tion,  and  arrested  for  a  while  all  negotiations.  It  was  only  on  the  1st  of  March,  1845, 
that  Congress  passed  a  joint  resolution  for  the  annexation. 

It  appears  most  clearly,  that  the  United  States  are  justly  entitled  to 'a  full  indem 
nity  for  the  injuries  done  to  their  citizens  ;  that,  before  the  Annexation  of  Texas, 
there  was  every  prospect  of  securing  that  indemnity ;  and  that  those  injuries,  even  if 
they  had  been  a  just  cause  for  war,  were  in  no  shape  whatever  the  cause  of  that  in 
which  we  are  now  involved. 

Are  the  United  States  justly  entitled  to  indemnity  for  any  other  cause  ?  This 
question  cannot  be  otherwise  solved,  than  by  an  inquiry  into  the  facts,  and  ascertain 
ing  by  whom,  and  how,  the  war  was  provoked. 

III. — Annexation  of  Texas. 

At  the  time  when  the  annexation  of  Texas  took  place,  Texas  had  been  recognized 
as  an  independent  power,  both  by  the  United  States  and  by  several  of  the  principal 
European  powers  ;  but  its  independence  had  not  been  recognized  by  Mexico,  and  the 
two  contending  parties  continued  to  be  at  war.  Under  those  circumstances,  there  is 
not  the  slightest  doubt  that  the  annexation  of  Texas  was  tantamount  to  a  declaration 
of  war  against  Mexico.  Nothing  can  be  more  clear  and  undeniable  than  that,  when 
ever  two  nations  are  at  war,  if  a  third  Power  shall  enter  into  a  treaty  of  alliance, 
offensive  and  defensive,  with  either  of  the  belligerents,  and  if  such  treaty  is  not  con 
tingent,  and  is  to  take  effect  immediately  and  pending  the  war,  such  treaty  is  a  decla 
ration  of  war  against  the  other  party.  The  causes  of  the  war  between  the  two  bellig 
erents  do  not  alter  the  fact.  Supposing  that  the  third  party,  the  interfering  Power, 
should  have  concluded  the  treaty  of  alliance  with  that  belligerent  who  was  clearly  en 
gaged  in  a  most  just  war,  the  treaty  would  not  be  the  less  a  declaration  of  war  against 
the  other  belligerent. 

If  Great  Britain  and  France  were  at  war,  and  the  United  States  were  to  enter  into 
such  a  treaty  with  either,  can  there  be  the  slightest  doubt  that  this  would  be  actual 
war  against  the  other  party  ?  that  it  would  be  considered  as  such,  and  that  it  must 
have  been  intended  for  that  purpose  ?  If  at  this  moment,  either  France  or  England 
were  to  make  such  a  treaty  with  Mexico,  thereby  binding  themselves  to  defend  and 
protect  it  with  all  their  forces  against  any  other  Power  whatever,  would  not  the  United 
States  instantaneously  view  such  a  treaty  as  a  declaration  of  war,  and  act  accordingly  ? 
But  the  annexation  of  Texas,  by  the  United  States,  was  even  more  than  a  treaty  of 
offensive  and  defensive  alliance.  It  embraced  all  the  conditions  and  all  the  duties 
growing  out  of  the  alliance  ;  and  it  imposed  them  forever.  From  the  moment  when 
Texas  had  been  annexed,  the  United  States  became  bound  to  protect  and  defend  her, 
so  far  as  her  legitimate  boundaries  extended,  against  any  invasion,  or  attack,  on  $he 
part  of  Mexico  :  and  they  have  uniformly  acted  accordingly. 

There  is  no  impartial  publicist  that  will  not  acknowledge  the  indubitable  truth  of 
these  positions  :  it  appears  to  me  impossible  that  they  should  be  seriously  denied  by  a 
single  person. 

It  appears  that  Mexico  was  at  that  time  disposed  to  acknowledge  the  independence 
of  Texas,  but  on  the  express  condition,  that  it  should  not  be  annexed  to  the  United 
States  ;  and  it  has  been  suggested,  that  this  was  done  under  the  influence  of  some  Eu 
ropean  Powers.  Whether  this  last  assertion  be  true  or  not,  is  not  known  to  me.  But 
the  condition  was  remarkable  and  offensive. 

Under  an  apprehension  that  Texas  might  be  tempted  to  accept  the  terms  proposed, 
the  Government  of  the  United  States  may  have  deemed  it  expedient  to  defeat  the 
plan,  by  offering  that  annexation,  which  had  been  formerly  declined,  when  the  Gov 
ernment  of  Texas  was  anxious  for  it. 

It  may  be  admitted  that,  whether  independent   or  annexed  to  the  United  States, 


4 

Texas  must  be  a  slave-holding  State,  so  long  as  slavery  shall  continue  to  exist  in 
North  America.  Its  whole  population,  with  hardly  any  exception,  consisted  of  citi 
zens  of  the  United  States.  Both  for  that  reason,  and  on  account  of  its  geographical 
position,  it  was  much  more  natural,  that  Jexas  should  be  a  member  of  the  United 
States,  than  of  the  Mexican  Confederation.  Viewed  purely  as  a  question  of  expe 
diency,  the  annexation  might  be  considered  as  beneficial  to  both  parties.  But  expe 
diency  is  not  justice.  Mexico  and  Texas  had  a\perfect  right  to  adjust  their  differences 
and  make  peace,  on  any  terms  they  might  deem  proper.  The  anxiety  to  prevent 
this  result  indicated  a  previous  disposition  ultimately  to  occupy  Texas  :  and  when  the 
annexation  was  accomplished;  when  it  was  seen,  that  the  United  States  had  appro 
priated  to  themselves  all  the  advantages  resulting  from  the  American  settlements  in 
Texas,  and  from  their  subsequent  insurrection  ;  the  purity  of  the  motives  of  our  Gov 
ernment  became  open  to  suspicion. 

Setting  aside  the  justice  of  the  proceeding,  it  is  true  that  it  had  been  anticipated, 
by  those  who  took  an  active  part  in  the  annexation,  that  the  weakness  of  Mexico 
would  compel  it  to  yield,  or  at  least  induce  her  not  to  resort  to  actual  war.  This  was 
verified  by  the  fact :  and  had  Government  remained  in  the  hands  with  whom  the  plan 
originated,  war  might  probably  have  been  avoided.  But  when  no  longer  in  power, 
they  could  neither  regulate  the  impulse  they  had  given,  nor  control  the  reckless  spirits 
they  had  evoked. 

Mexico,  sensible  of  her  weakness,  declined  war,  and  only  resorted  to  a  suspension  of 
diplomatic  intercourse  ;  but  a  profound  sense  of  the  injury  inflicted  by  the  United  States 
has  ever  since  rankled  in  their  minds.  It  will  be  found,  through  all  their  diplomatic  cor 
respondence,  through  all  their  manifestoes,  that  the  Mexicans,  even  to  this  day,  per 
petually  recur  to  this  never-forgotten  offensive  measure.  And,  on  the  other  hand,  the 
subsequent  administration  of  our  Government  seems  to  have  altogether  forgotton  this 
primary  act  of  injustice,  and,  in  their  negotiations,  to  have  acted  as  if  this  was  only  an 
accomplished  fact,  and  had  been  a  matter  of  course. 

IV. — Negotiations  and  War. 

In  September,  1845,  the  President  of  the  United  States  directed  their  consul  at 
Mexico  to  ascertain  from  the  Mexican  Government,  whether  it  would  receive  an  En 
voi  from  the  United  States,  intrusted  with  full  power  to  adjust  all  the  questions  in 
dispute  between  the  two  Governments. 

The  answer  of  Mr.  De  la  Pena  y  Pena,  Minister  of  the  Foreign  Relations  of  Mexico, 
was,  u  That  although  the  Mexican  nation  was  deeply  injured  by  the  United  States, 
through  the  acts  committed  by  them  in  the  department  of  Texas,  which  belongs  to  his 
nation,  his  Government  wa.s  disposed  to  receive  the  (Jommimtwne.r  of  the  United  States 
who  might  come  to  the  capital,  with  full  powers  from  his  Government  to  settle  the 
present  dispute  in  a  peaceful,  reasonable  and  honorable  manner  ;"  thus  giving  a  new 
proof 'that,  even  in  the  midst  of  its  injuries  and  of  its  firm  decision  to  exact  adequate 
reparation  for  them,  the  Government  of  Mexico  does  not  reply  with  contumely  to  the 
measures  of  reason  and  peace  to  which  it  was  invited  by  its  adversary. 

The  Mexican  Minister  at  the  sam3  tim  i  intimated,  that  the  previous  recall  of  the 
whole  naval  force  of  the  United  States,  then  lyinn;  in  sight  of  the  port  of  Vera  Cruz, 
was  indispensable  ;  and  this  was  accordingly  done  by  our  Government. 

if'it  it  is  essential  to  obsvve  that,  whilst  Mr.  Black  had,  according  to  his  instruc 
tions,  inquired,  whether  the  Mexican  Government  would  receive  an  Eiinoif  from  the 
United  States,  with  full  power  to  adjust  all  the  questions  in  dispute  between  the  two 
Governments,  the  Mexican  Minister  had  answered,  that  his  Government  was  dis 
posed  to  receive  the  COHI^S <*»<>€••  of  the  United  States,  who  might  come  with  lull 
powers  to  settle  the  present  dispute  in  a  peaceful,  reasonable  and  honorable  manner. 

Mr.  Slidell  was,  in  November  following,  appointed  Envoy  Extraordinary  and  Min 
ister  Plenipotentiary  of  the  United  States  of  America  near  the  Government  of  the 
Mexican  Republic  ;  and  he  arrived  in  Mexico  on  the  sixth  of  December. 

Mi1.  Herrera,  the  President  of  Mexico,  was  undoubtedly  disposed  to  settle  the  dis 
putes  between  the  two  countries.  But  taking  advantage  of  thj  irritation  of  the  mass 
of  the  people,  his  political  opponents  were  attempting  to  overset  him  for  having  made, 
as  they  said,  unworthy  concessions  The  arrival  of  Mr.  Slidell  disturbed  him  ex 
tremely  ;  and  Mr.  Pena  y  Pena  declared  to  Mr.  Black,  that  his  appearance  in  the 


5 

capital  at  this  time  might  prove  destructive  to  the  Government,  and  thus  defeat  the 
whole  'affair./  Under  these  circumstances  General  Herrera  complained  without  any 
foundatioi>;  that  Mr.  Slidell  had  come  sooner  than  had  been  understood  ;  he  resorted 
to  several  frivolous  objections  against  the  tenor  of  his  powers  ;  and  he  intimated  that 
the  difficulties  respecting  Texas  must  be  adjusted  before  any  other  subject  of  discus 
sion  should  be  taken  into  consideration. 

But  the  main  question  was,  whether  Mexico  should  receive  Mr.  Slidell  in  the 
character  of  Envoy  Extraordinary  and  Minister  Plenipotentiary,  to  reside  in  the  re 
public.  It  was  insisted  by  the  Mexican  Government,  that  it  had  only  agreed  to  re 
ceive  a  commissioner",  to  treat  on  the  questions  which  had  arisen  from  the  events  in 
Texas  ;  and  that  until  this  was  done,  the  suspended  diplomatic  intercourse  could  not 
be  restored,  and  a  residing  minister  plenipotentiary  be  admitted. 

Why  our  Government  should  have  insisted  that  the  intended  negotiation  should  be 
carried  on  by  a  residing  Envoy  Extraordinary  and  Minister  Plenipotentiary,  is  not 
understood.  The  questions  at  issue  might  have  been  discussed  and  settled  as  easily, 
fully,  and  satisfactorily,  by  commissioners  appointed  for  that  special  purpose,  as  by 
residing  ministers  or  envoys.  It  is  well  known  that  when  diplomatic  relations  have 
been  superseded  by  war,  traaties  o>f  peace  have  been  almost  universally  negotiated  by 
commissioners  appointed  for  that  special  purpose,  who  arc  personally  amply  protected 
by  the  law  of  nations,  but  who  are  not'rcceived  as  resident  ministers,  till  after  the 
peace  has  restored  the  ordinary  diplomatic  intercourse.  Thus  the  treaty  of  peace  of 
1783,  between  France  and  England,  was  negotiated  and  concluded  at  Paris  by  British 
commissioners  who  were  not  admitted  as  resident  envoys  or  ministers. 

The  only  distinction  which  can  possibly  be  made  between  the  two  cases  is,  that 
there  was  not  as  yet  actual  war  between  Mexico  and  the  United  States.  But  the  an 
nexation  of  Texas  was  no  ordinary  occurrence.  It  was  a  most  clear  act  of  unprovoked 
aggression  ;  a  deep  and  most  offensive  injury  ;  in  fact,  a  declaration  of  war,  if  Mexico 
had  accepted  it  as  such.  In  lieu  of  this,  that  country  had  only  resorted  to  a  suspen 
sion  of  the  ordinary  diplomatic  relations.  It  would  seem  as  if  our  Government  had 
considered  this  as  an  act  of  unparalleled  audacity,  which  Mexico  must  be  compelled  to 
retract,  before  any  negotiations  for  the  arrangement  of  existing  difficulties  could  take 
place  ;  as  an  insult  to  the  Government  and  to  the  nation,  which  must  compel  it  to 
'assert  its  just  rights  and  to  avenge  its  injured  honor. 

General  Herrera  was  not  mistaken  in  his  anticipations.  His  government  was  overset 
in  the  latter  end  of  the  month  of  December,  1845,  and  fell  into  the  hands  of  those 
who  had  denounced  him/or  having  listened  to  Overtures  for  an  arrangement  of  the  diffi 
culties  between  the  two  nations. 

When  Mexico  felt  its  inability  to  contend  with  the  United  States ;  and,  instead  of 
considering  the  annexation  Texas  to  be,  as  it  really  was,  tantamount  to  a  declaration 
of  war,  only  suspended  the  ordinary  diplomatic  relations  between  the  two  countries, 
its  Government,  if  directed  by  wise  counsels,  and  not  impeded  by  popular  irritation, 
should  at  once,  since  it  had  already  agreed  to  recognize  the  independence  -of  Texas, 
have  entered  into  a  negotiation  with  the  United  States,  At  that  time  there  would 
have  been  no  intrinsic  difficulty  in  making  a  final  arrangement,  founded  on  an  uncon 
ditional  recognition  of  the  independence  of  Texas,  within  its  legitimate  boundaries. 
Popular  feeling  and  the  ambition  of  contending  military  leaders,  prevented  that 
peaceable  termination  of  those  unfortunate  dissensions. 

Yet,  when  Mexico  refused  to  receive  Mr.  Slidell  as  an  Envoy  Extraordinary  and 
Minister  Plenipotentiary,  the  United  States  should  have  remembered,  that  we  had 
been  the  aggressors,  that  we  had  committed  an  act  acknowledged,  as  well  by  the 
practical  law  of  nations,  as  by  common  sense  and  common  justice,  to  be  tantamount 
to  a  declaration  of  war  ;  and  they  should  have  waited  with  patience,  till  the  fe'elings 
excited  by  our  own  conduct  had  subsided. 

General  Taylor  had  been  instructed  by  the  War  Department,  as  early  as  May, 
28,  1845,  to  cause  the  forces  under  his  command  to  be  put  into  a  position  where  they 
might  most  promptly  and  efficiently  act  in  defence  of  Texas,  in  the  event  that  it 
should  become  necessary  or  proper  to  employ  them  for  that  purpose.  By  subsequent 
instructions,  and  after  the  people  of  Texas  had  accepted  the  proposition  of  annexa 
tion,  he  was  directed  to  select  and  occupy  a  position  adapted  to  repel  invasion,  as 
near  the  boundary  line,  the'Rio  Grande,  as  prudence  would  dictate;  and  that,  with 


this  view,  a  part  of  his  forces  at  least  should  be  west  of  the  river  Nueces.  It  was 
certainly  the  duty  of  the  President  to  protect  Texas  against  invasion,  from  the  mo 
ment  it  had  been  annexed  to  the  United  States  ;  and  as  that  republic  was  in  actual 
possession  of  Corpus  Christi,  which  was  the  position  selected  by  General  Taylor,  there 
was  nothing,  in  the  position  he  had  taken,  indicative  of  any  danger  of  actual  hostilities. 

But  our  Government  seems  to  have  considered  the  refusal,  on  the  part  of  Mexico, 
to  receive  Mr.  Slidell  as  a  resident  Envoy  of  the  United  States,  as  necessarily  leading 
to  war.  The  Secretary  of  State,  in  his  letter  to  Mr.  Slidell  of  January  28,  1846, 
says  : — 

"  Should  the  Mexican  Government  finally  refuse  to  receive  you,  the  bup  of  forbearance  «wu* 
then  have  been  exhausted.  Nothing  can  remain  but  to  take  the  redress  of  the  injuries  to  our  citi 
zens,  and  the  insults  to  our  Government,  into  our  own  hands." 

And  again  : —  .l]t,  .. 

"  Should  the  Mexican  Government  finally  refuse  to  receive  you,  then  demand  passports  from  the 
proper  authority,  and  return  to  the  United  States.  It  will  then  become  the  duty  of  the  President 
to  submit  the  whole  case  to  Congress,  and  call  upon  the  nation  to  assert  its  just  rights,  and 
avenge  its  injured  honor." 

With  the  same  object  in  view,  the  Secretary  of  War  did,  by  his  letter  dated  Jan 
uary  13,  1846,  instruct  General  Taylor 

"  To  advance  and  occupy,  with  the  troops  under  his  command,  positions  on  or  near  the  east  bank 

of  the  Rio  del  Norte It  is  presumed  Point  Isabel  will  be  considered  by  you  an  eligible 

position.  This  point,  or  some  one  near  it,  and  points  opposite  Matamoras  and  JVIier,  and  in  the 

vicinity  of  Laredo,  are  suggested  for  your  consideration Should  you  attempt  to  exercise 

the  right,  which  the  United"  States  have  in  common  with  Mexico,  to  the  free  navigation  of  this  river, 
it  is  probable  that  Mexico  would  interpose  resistance.  You  will  not  attempt  to  enforce  this  right 

without  further  instructions It  is  not  designed,  in  our  present  relations  with  Mexico,  that 

you  should  treat  her  as  an  enemy  ;  but,  should  she  assume  that  character  by  a  declaration  of  war, 
or  any  open  act  of  hostility  towards  us,  you  will  not  act  merely  on  the  defensive  if  your  relative 
means  enable  you  to  do  otherwise." 

The  administration  was  therefore  of  opinion,  that  this  military  occupation  of  the 
territory  in  question  was  not  an  act  of  hostility  towards  Mexico,  or  treating  her  as  an 
enemy.  Now,  I  do  aver,  without  fear  of  contradiction,  that  whenever  a  territory 
claimed  by  two  powers  is,  and  has  been  for  a  length  of  time,  in  the  possession  of  one 
of  them,  if  the  other  should  invade  and  take  possession  of  it  by  military  force,  such  an 
act  is  an  open  act  of  hostility,  according  to  the  acknowledged  and  practical  law  of 
nations.  In  this  case  the  law  of  nations  only  recognizes  a  clear  and  positive  fact. 

The  sequel  is  well  known.  General  Taylor,  with  his  troops,  left  Corpus  Christi, 
March  8th  to  llth,  1846,  and  entered  the  desert  which  separates  that  place  from  the 
vicinity  of  the  del  Norte.  On  the  21st  he  was  encamped  three  miles  south  of  the 
Arroyo,  or  Little  Colorado,  having  by  the  i;oute  he  took  marched  135  miles,  and  being 
nearly  north  of  Matamoras  about  thirty  miles  distant.  He  had  on  the  19th  met  a  party 
of  irregular  Mexican  cavalry,  who  informed  him  that  they  had  peremptory  orders,  if 
he  passed  the  river,  to  fire  upon  his  troops,  and  that  it  would  be  considered  a  declara 
tion  o/  war.  The  river  was  however  crossed  without  a  single  shot  having  been  fired. 
In  a  proclamation  issued  on  the  12th,  General  Mejia,  who  commanded  the  forces  ,of 
the  Department  of  Tamaulipas,  asserts,  that  the  limits  of  Texas  are  certain  and 
recognized,  and  never  had  extended  beyond  the  river  Nueoes,  that  the  cabinet  of  the 
United  States  coveted  the  regions  on  the  left  bank  of  the  Rio  Bravo,  and  that  the 
American  army  was  now  advancing  to  take  possession  of  a  large  part  of  Tamaulipas. 
On  the  24th  March  General  Taylor  reached  a  point  on  the  route  from  Matamoras  to 
Point  Isabel,  eighteen  miles  from  the  former,  and  ten  from  the  latter  place,  where  a 
deputation  sent  him  a  formal  Protest  of  the  Prefect  of  the  Northern  District  of  the 
Department  of  Tamaulipas,  declaring,  in  behalf  of  the  citizens  of  the  district,  that  they 
never  will  consent  to  separate  themselves  from  the  Mexican  Republic,  and  to  unite 
themselves  with  the  United  States.  On  the  12th  of  April,  the  Mexican  General 
Ampudia  required  General  Taylor  to  break  up  his  camp  within  twenty-four  hours, 
and  to  retire  to  the  other  bank  of  the  Nueces  river,  and  notified  him  that,  if  he  persisted 
in  remaining  upon  the  soil  of  the  Department  of  Tamaulipas,  it  would  clearly  result 
that  arms  alone  must  decide  the  question  ;  in  which  case  he  declared  that  the 
Mexicans  would  accept  the  war  to  which  they  had  been  provoked.  On  the  24th  of 
April,  General  Arista  arrived  in  Matamoras,  and  on  the  same  day  informed  General 
Taylor,  that  he  considered  hostilities  commenced,  and  would  prosecute  them.  On 


r 

the  same  day,  a  party  of  sixty-three  American  dragoons,  who  had  been  sent  some  dis 
tance  up  the  left  bank  of  the  river,  became  engaged  with  a  very  large  force  of  the 
enemy,  and  after  a  short  affair,  in  which  about  sixteen  were  killed  or  wounded,  were 
surrounded  and  compelled  to  surrender.  These  facts  were  laid  before  Congress  by 
the  President  in  his  message  of  the  llth  of  May. 

V. — The  claim  of  Texas  to  the  Rio  del  Norte,  as  its  boundary,  examined. 

From  what  precedes  it  appears,  that  the  Government  of  the  United  States  con 
sidered  the  refusal  of  Mexico  to  receive  a  resident  Envoy,  or  minister,  as  a  sufficient 
cause  for  war  ;  and  the  Rio  del  Norte  as  the  legitimate  boundary  vof  Texas.  The  first 
opinion  is  now  of  no  importance  ;  but  the  question  of  boundary,  which  was  the  imme 
diate  cause  of  hostilities,  has  to  this  day  been  the  greatest  impediment  to  the  restora 
tion  of  peace.  I  feel  satisfied,  that  if  this  was  settled,  there  would  be  no  insuperable 
difficulty  in  arranging  other  pretensions. 

The  United  States  claim  no  other  portion  of  the  Mexican  dominions,  unless  it  be 
by  right  of  conquest.  The  tract  of  country  between  the  Rio  Nueces  and  the  del 
Norte,  is  the  only  one,  which  has  been  claimed  by  both  parties,  as  respectively  be 
longing  either  to  Texas  or  to  Mexico.  As  regards  every  other  part  of  the  Mexican 
possessions,  the  United  States  never  had  claimed  any  portion  of  it.  The  iniquity  of 
acquiring  any  portion  of  it,  otherwise  than  by  fair  compact  freely  consented  to  by 
Mexico,  is  self-evi'dent.  It  is,  in  every  respect,  most  important  to  examine  the 
grounds  on  which  the  claim  of  the  United  States  to  the  only  territory  claimed  by 
both  nations  is  founded.  It  is  the  main  question  at  issue.* 

The  Republic  of  Texas  did,  by  an  act  of  December,  1836,  .declare  the  Rio  del 
Norte  to  be  its  boundary.  It  will  not  be  seriously  contended,  that  a  nation  has  a 
right,  by  a  law  of  its  own,  to  determine  what  is  or  shall  be  the  boundary  between  it 
and  another  country.  The  act  was  nothing  more  than  the  expression  of  the  wishes 
or  pretensions  of  the  Government.  Its  only  practical  effect  was  that,  emanating  from 
its  Congress  or  legislative  body,  it  made  it  imperative  on  the  Executive  not  to  con 
clude  any  peace  with  Mexico,  unless  that  boundary  was  agreed  to.  As  regards  right, 
the  act  of  Texas  is  a  perfect  nullity.  We  want  the  arguments  and  documents  by 
which  the  claim  is  sustained. 

On  a  first  view  the  pretension  is  truly  startling.  There  is  no  exception  :  the  Rio 
Norte  from  its  source  to  its  mouth'is  declared  to  be  the  rightful  boundry  of  Texas. 
That  river  has  its  source  within  the  department,  province,  or  state  of  New  Mexico, 
which  it  traverses  through  its  whole  length  from  north  to  south,  dividing  it  into  two 
unequal  parts.  The  largest  and  most  populous,  includiwg  Santa  Fe,  the  capital,  lies 
on  the  left  bank  of  the  river,  and  is  therefore  embraced  within  the  claim  of  Texas. 
Now  this  province  of  New  Mexico  was  first  visited  and  occupied  by  the  Spaniards 
under  Vasquez  Coronado,  in  the  years  1540  to  1542.  It  was  at  that  time  voluntarily 
evacuated,  subsequently  re-visited,  and  some  settlements  made  about  the  year  1583  : 
finally  conquered  in  1 595  by  the  Spaniards,  under  the  command  of  Onate.  An  insurrection 
of  the  Indians  drove  away  the  Spaniards  in  the  year  1680.  They  re-entered  it  the  ensuing 
year,  and  after  a  long  resistance  re-conquered  it.  This  was  an  internal  conflict  with 
the  Aborigines;  but  as  related  to  foreign  powers,  the  sovereignty  of  the  Spaniards 
over  the  territory  was  never  called  in  question  ;  and  it  was,  in  express  terms,  made 
the  western  boundary  of  Louisiana  in  the  Royal  Charter  of  the  French  Government. 

The  conquest  of  the  province  by  Onate,  took  place  five-and-twenty  years  prior  to 
the  landing  of  the  Pilgrims  in  New  England,  and  twelve  years  before  any  permanent 
settlement  had  been  made  in  North  America,  on  the  shores  of  the  Atlantic,  by  either 
England,  France,  Holland,  or  any  other  power,  but  that  in  Florida  by  Spain  herself. 

I  have  in  vain  sought  for  any  document,  emanating  from  the  Republic  or  State  of 
Texas,  for  the  purpose  of  sustaining  its  claim  either  to  New  Mexico  or  to  the  country 
bordering  on  the  lower  portion  of  the  del  Norte.  The  only  official  papers  within  my 
reach,  in  which  the  claim  of  Texas  is  sustained,  are  the  President's  messages  of  May 
llth  and  Dec.  3rd,  1846  ;  and  these  refer  only  to  the  country  bordering  on  the  lower 
part  of  the  del  Norte.  The  portion  of  the  message  of  May  llth,  1846,  relating  to 
that  subject,  is  as  follows : 

"  Meantime  Texas,  by  the  final  action  of  our  Congress,  had  become  an  integral  part  of  our  Union. 
The  Congress  of  Texas,  by  its  act  of  December  19,  1836,  had  declared  the  Rio  del  Norte  to  be  the 


boundary  of  that  republic.  Its  jurisdiction  bad  been  extended  and  exercised  beyond  tbe  Nueces. 
The  country  between  that  river  and  the  del  Norte  had  b?en  represented  in  the  Congress  and  in  the 
Convention  of  Texas;  had  thus  taken  part  in  the  act  of  annexation  itself;  and  is  now  included 
within  one  of  our  congressional  districts.  Our  own  Congress  had,  moreover,  with  great  unanimity, 
by  the  act  approved  December  31,  1845,  recognized  the  country  beyond  the  Nueces  as  a  part  of  our 
territory,  by  including  it  within  our  own  revenue  system;  and  a  revenue  officer,  to  reside  within 
that  district,  has  been  appointed,  by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Senate.  It  became, 
therefore,  of  urgent  necessity  to  provide  for  the  defence  of  that  portion  of  our  country.  Accord 
ingly,  on  the  13th  of  January  last,  instructions  were  issued  to  the  general  in  command  of  these 
troops  to  occupy  the  left  bank  of  the  del  Norte 

*'  The  movement  of  the  troops  to  the  del  Norte  was  made  by  the  commanding  general,  under 
positive  instructions  to  abstain  from  all  aggressive  acts  towards  Mexico  or  Mexican  citizens,  and  to 
regard  the  relations  between  that  Republic  and  the  United  States  as  peaceful,  unless  she  should 
declare  war,  or  commit  acts  of  hostility  indicative  of  a  state  of  war.  He  was  specially  directed  to 
protect  private  property,  and  respect  personal  rights." 

In  his  annual  message  of  December  8,  1846,  the  President  states  that  Texas,  as 
ceded  to  the  United  States  by  France  in  1803,  has  been  always  claimed  as  extending 
west  to  the  Rio  Grande  ;  that  this  fact  is  established  by  declarations  of  our  Govern 
ment  during  Mr.  Jefferson's  and  Mr.  Monroe's  administrations  ;  and  that  the  Texas 
which  was  ceded  to  Spain  by  the  Florida  treaty  of  1819,  embraced  all  the  country 
now  claimed  by  the  State  of  Texas  between  the  Nueces  and  the  Rio  Grande. 

He  then  repeats  the  Acts  of  Texas  with  reference  to  their  boundaries  ;  stating  that : 

"  During  a  period  of  more  than  nine  years,  which  intervened  between  the  adoption  of  her  con 
stitution  and  her  annexation  as  one  of  the  States  of  our  Union,  Texas  asserted  and  exercised 
many  acts  of  sovereignty  and  jurisdiction  over  the  territory  and  inhabitants  west  of  the  Nueces  ; 
such  as  organizing  and  defining  limits  of  counties  extending  to  the  Rio  Grande  :  establishing 
courts  of  justice,  and  extending  her  judicial  system  over  the  territory;  establishing  also  a  custom 
house,  post-offices,  a  land-office,  &c." 

The  President  designates  by  the  name  of  Texas,  the  cession  of  Louisiana  by  France 
to  the  United  States  ;  and  he  again  calls  the  territory  ceded  to  Spain  by  the  Florida 
treaty  of  1819,  the  Texas.  He  intimates  that  the  claim  of  the  United  States  to  the 
territory  between  the  Sabine  and  the  Rio  Norte,  was  derived  from  the  boundaries  of 
Texas,  and  that  by  claiming  as  far  west  as  tnis  river,  the  United  States  did  recognize 
that  it  was  the  boundary  of  the  Texas.  I  really  do  not  understand  what  is  meant  by 
this  assertion. 

The  United  States  claimed  the  Rio  Norte  as  being  the  legitimate  boundary  of 
Louisiana,  and  not  of  Texas.  Neither  they  nor  France  had  ever  been  in  possession 
of  the  country  beyond  the  Sabine.  Spain  had  always  held  possession,  and  had  divided 
the  territory  into  provinces  as  she  pleased.  One  of  these  was  called  Texas,  and  its 
boundaries  had  been  designated  and  altered  at  her  will.  With  these  the  United  States 
had  no  concern.  If  their  claim  could  be  sustained,  it  must  be  by  proving  that  Louisiana 
extended  of  right  thus  far.  This  had  no  connection  with  the  boundaries  which  Spain  might 
have  assigned  to  her  province  of  Texas.  These  might  have  extended  beyond  the  Rio 
del  Norte,  or  have  been  east  of  the  Rio  Nueces.  There  is  not  the  slightest  connection 
between  the  legitimate  boundaries  of  Louisiana,  and  those  of  the  Spanish  province  of 
Texas.  The  presumed  identity  is  a  mere  supposition. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  discuss  the  soundness  of  the  pretensions  to  the  Rio  Norte, 
asserted  by  Mr.  Jefferson  and  Mr.  Monroe,  since  they  were  yielded  in  exchange  of 
Florida  and  some  other  objects  by  the  treaty  of  1819  ;  a.  treaty  extremely  popular  at 
the  time,  and  the  execution  of  which  was  pressed  with  great  zeal  and  perseverance. 

Whenever  ultimately  ceded  to  Mexico,  tha~t  republic  fixed  its  boundaries  as  it 
thought  proper.  Texas  and  Cohahuila  were  declared  to  form  a  state  ;  and  the  Rio 
Nueces  was  made  the  boundary  of  Texas.  When  Texas  declared  itself  independent, 
it  was  the  insurrection  of  only  part  of  a  state ;  for  Cohahuila  remained  united  to  Mexico. 
But  the  Rio  Nueces  was  the  boundary  between  the  depaitment  of  To  as  and  the  state 
of  Tamaulipas.  The  whole  contested  territory  lies  within  the  limits  of  Tarnaulipas, 
which  never  was,  under  the  Mexican  Government,  connected  in  any  shape  with  Texas. 

The  question  now  under  consideration  is  only  that  between  the  United  States  and 
Mexico  ;  and  in  that  view  of  the  subject,  it  is  quite  immaterial  whether  the  acts  of  the 
United  States  emanated  from  Congress,  or  from  the  Executive.  No  act  of  either, 
recognizing  the  country  beyond  the  Nueces,  as  a  part  of  the  territory  of  the  United 
States,  can  be  alleged  against  Mexico,  as  a  proof  of  their  right  to  the  country  thus 
claimed.  Any  such  act  is  only  an  assertion,  a  declaration,  but  not  an  argument 


sustaining  the  right.  It  is,  however,  proper  to  observe  here,  that  the  port  of  delivery  west 
of  the  Nueces,ej-ected  by  the  act  of  Congress  'To  establish  a  collection  district  in  the  state 
of  Texas,'  w^S  at  Corpus  Christi,  a  place  which  was  in  the  actual  possession  in  that  state. 
It  must  also  be  premised  that,  in  the  joint  resolution  for  the  annexation  of  Texas, 
the  qup<<tion  of  the  boundary  between  it  and  Mexico  was  expressly  reserved,  as  one 
which  should  be  settled  by  treaty  between  the  United  States  and  Mexico. 

The  only  arguments  in  the  President's  message  which  sustain  the  right  of  Texas  to 
territory  beyond  the  Nueces,  are  contained  in  those  passages,  in  which  it  is  asserted, 
that  the  jurisdiction  of  Texas  had  been  extended  and  exercised  beyond  the  Nueces; 
that  the  country  between  that  river  and  the  del  Norte  had  been  represented  in  the 
Congress  and  Convention  of  Texas,  had  taken  part  in  the  annexation  itself,  and  was 
now  included  within  one  of  our  congressional  districts. 

But  it  is  not  stated  in  the  President's  message,  how  far  beyond  the  Nueces  the  ju 
risdiction  of  Texas  had  been  extended,  nor  what  part  of  the  country  between  that 
river  and  the  del  Norte  had  been  represented  in  the  Congress  and  Convention  of 
Texas,  and  was  then  included  within  one  of  our  congressional  districts. 

Now  the  actual  jurisdiction  beyond  the  Nueces  never  extended  farther  than  the 
adjacent  settlement  of  San  Patricio,  consisting  of  about  twenty  families.  That  small 
district,  though  beyond  the  Nueces,  was  contiguous  to,  and  in  the  actual  possession  of 
Texas.  On  this  account  it  might  be  rightfully  included  within  the  limits,  which  we 
were  bound  to  protect  against  Mexican  invasion. 

But  what  was  the  country  between  this  small  settlement  of  San  Patricio,  or  between 
Corpus  Christi  and  the  Rio  del  Norte,  over  which  it  might  be  supposed  from  the  mes 
sage,  that  the  jurisdiction  of  Texas  had  been  extended,  so  as  to  be  included  within 
one  of  our  congressional  districts  ?  Here,  again,  Texas  had  erected  that  small  settle 
ment  into  a  county  called  San  Patricio,  and  declared  that  this  county  extended  to  the 
Rio  del  Norte.  This,  like  all  other  declaratory  acts  of  the  same  kind,  was  only  an 
assertion  not  aifecting  the  question  of  right.  The  State  of  Texas  might,  with  equal 
propriety,  have  declared  that  their  boundary  extended  to  the  Sierra  Madre  or  to  the 
Pacific.  The  true  question  of  right  to  any  territory  beyond  the  Mexican  limits  of 
the  Department  of  Texas  depends  on  the  facts  :  By  whom  was  the  territory  in  ques 
tion  actually  inhabited  and  occupied  ?  and  had  the  inhabitants  united  with  Texas  in 
the  insurrection  against  Mexico  ?  ' 

The  whole  country  beyond  the  settlement  of  San  Patricio  and  Corpus  Christi,  till 
within  a  few  miles  of  the  del  Norte,  is  a  perfect  desert,  one  hundred  and  sixty  miles 
wide  by  the  route  pursued  by  General  Taylor,  as  stated  by  himself,  and  near  one 
hundred  and  twenty  miles  in  a  straight  line. 

The  only  settled  part  of  it  is  along  the  left  bank  of  the  del  Norte,  and  but  a  few 
miles  in  breadth.  This  belt  was  settled,  inhabited  and  occupied  exclusively  by  Mex 
icans.  It  included. the  town  of  Loredo  ;  and  Mexico  had  a  custom-house  at  Brazos, 
north  of  the  mouth  of  the  river.  Till  occupied  by  the  American  arms  it  had  ever  been, 
and  was  at  the1  time  when  invaded  by  General  Taylor,  a  part  of  the  Department  of 
Tamaulipas,  and  subject  to  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Prefect  of  the  Northern  District 
of  that  department. 

In  the  course  of  the  war  between  Mexico  and  Texas,  incursions  had  been  occasion 
ally  made  by  each  party  into  the  territories  of  the  other.  A  Mexican  officer  had, 
onco  or  twice,  obtained  temporary  occupation  of  San  Antonio,  within  the  limits  of 
Texas  ;  and  the  Texans  had  on  one  oc-casion  taken  Loredo  itself,  and  more  than  once 
had  carried  their  arms,  not  only  to  the  left  bank  of  the  del  Norte,  but  even  beyond 
that  river.  In  both  cases  the  aggressive  partieshadbeen  repulsed  and  expelled.  The 
last -Texan  expedition  of  that  kind  took  place  in  December,  1842,  and  terminated  in 
their  defeat  at  Mier. 

That  the  country,  adjacent  to  the  left  bank  of  the  river,  was  exclusively  in  the  pos 
session  of  the  Mexicans,  was  well  known  to  our  Government. 

When  General  Taylor  marched  to  the  del  Norte,  he  issued  an  order  (No.  30) 
translated  into  the  Spanish,  ordering  all  under  his  command,  to  observe  with  the  most 
scrupulous  respect  the  rights  of  all  the  inhabitants,  who  might  be  found  in  peaceful 
prosecution  of  their  respective  occupations,  as  well  on  the  left  as  on  the  right  side  of 
the  Rio  Grande.  No  interference,  he  adds,  will  be  allowed  with  the  civil  rights  o 
religious  privileges  of  the  inhabitants. 


10 

In  June,  1845,  General  Taylor  had  been  directed  to  select  and  occupy,  on  or  near 
the  Rio  Grande  del  Norte,  such  a  site  as  would  be  best  adapted  to  repel  invasion  and 
to  protect  our  Western  border.  But  on  the  8th  of  July  following,  the  Secretary  of 
War  (Mr.  Marcy)  addressed  the  following  letter  to  him  : 

"  This  Department  is  informed  that  Mexico  has  some  military  establishments  on  the  East  side  of 
the  Rio  Grande,  which  are,  and  for  some  time  have  been,  in  the  actual  occupancy  of  her  troops- 
In  carrying  out  the  instructions  heretofore  received,  you  will  be  careful  to  avoid  any  acts  of  ag 
gression,  unless  an  actual  state'of  war  should  exist.  The  Mexican  forces  at  the  posts  in*their 
possession,  and  which  have  been  so,  will  not  be  disturbed  as  long  as  the  relations  of  peace  between 
the  United  States  and  Mexico  continue." 

On  the  30th  July,  1845,  the  Secretary  again  addresses  Gen.  Taylor  as  follows  : 

"  You  are  expected  to  occupy,  protect  and  defend  the  territory  of  Texas,  to  the  extent  that  it  has 
been  occupied  by  the  people  of  Texas.  The  Rio  Grande  is  claimed  to  be  the  boundary  between 
the  two  countries,  and  up  to  this  boundary  you  are  to  extend  your  protection,  only  excepting  any 
posts  on  the  Eastern  side  thereof,  which  are  in  the  actual  occupancy  of  Mexican  forces,  or  Mexi 
can  settlements,  over  which  the  Republic  of  Texas  did  not  exercise  jurisdiction  at  the  period  of  an 
nexation,  or  shortly  before  that  event.  It  is  expected,  in  selecting  the  establishment  for  your 
troops,  you  will  approach  as  near  the  boundary  line,  the  Rio  Grande,  as  prudence  will  dictate. 
With  this  view,  the  President  desires  that  your  position,  for  a  part  of  your  forces  at  least,  should 
be  west  of  the  River  Nueces." 

The  Mexican  settlements,  thus  excepted,  are  not  those  over  which  Texas  did  not  claim 
jurisdiction,  but  those  on  the  East  bank  of  the  Rio  Grande,  over  which  Texas  did  not 
exercise  jurisdiction  at  the  period  mentioned.  The  President  had  no  authority  to  give 
up  the  boundary  claimed  by  Texas :  but  it  is  clear  that  at  that  time,  when  war  was 
not  contemplated,  the  Administration  was  of  opinion  that,  till  the  question  was  defi 
nitely  settled,  the  occupancy  by  the  Mexicans  of  the  territory  adjacent  the  left  bank 
of  the  del  Norte  ought  not  to  be  disturbed.  Neither  the  subsequent  refusal  by  Mex 
ico  to  receive,  a  residing  Envoy,  nor  the  successes  of  the  American  arms,  have  affected 
the  question  of  right.  The  claim  of  Texas,  whether  to  New.  Mexico,  or  to  the  low 
er  portion  of  the  Rio  Norte,  was  identically  the  same,  as  invalid  and  groundless  in 
one  case  as  in  the  other.  Why  a  distinction  has  been  made  by  the  Executive  has  not 
been  stated.  The  fact  is  that  he  has  established  a  temporary  government  for  New 
Mexico,  as  a  country  conquered,  and  without  any  regard  to  the  claim  of  Texas  ;  whilst 
on  the  other  hand,  he  has  permitted  that  State  to  extend  its  jurisdiction  over  the 
country  lying  on  the  left  bank  of  the  del  Norte,  which,  like  New  Mexico,  had  been 
conquered  by  the  arms  of  the  United  States.  Not  a  shadow  of  proof  has  been  ad 
duced  to  sustain  the  pretensions  of  Texas  to  that  district;  and  justice  imperiously  re 
quires  that  it  should  by  the  treaty  of  peace  be  restored  to  Mexico. 

It  so  happens  that  the  boundary,  which  may  be  traced  in  conformity  with  this  prin 
ciple,  is  a  natural  one,  and  that,  as  a  measure  of  expediency,  none  more  eligible  could 
have  been  devised.  A  desert  of  one  hundred  and  twenty  miles  separates  the  most  south 
westerly  Texan  settlements  of  Corpus  Christi  and  San' Patrick*,  from  those  of  the  Mex 
icans,  on  the  left  bank  of  the  del  Norte,  than  which  no  boundary  could  be  devised, 
better  calculated  to  prevent  collisions  hereafter  between  the  two  nations.  It  will  be 
sufficient,  for  that  purpose,  to  draw  a  nominal  line  through  the  desert,  leaving  all  the 
waters  that  empty  into  the  Rio  Norte  to  Mexico,  and  all  those  that  empty  into  the  Rio 
Nueces  to  Texas,  together  with  such  other  provisions,  respecting  fortifications  and  mili 
tary  posts,  as  may  be  necessary  for  the  preservation  of  jDeace. 

The  line  of  the  Rio  Norte  is  one,  from  which  Mexico  would  be  perpetually  threat 
ened,  and  from  which  their  adjacent  towns  on  the  eastern  bank  may  be  bombarded. 
Such  an  intolerable  nuisance  would  perpetuate  most  hostile  feelings.  With  such  a 
narrow  river  as  the  Rio  del  Norte,  and  with  a  joint  right  of  navigation,  repeated  col 
lisions  would  be  unavoidable. 

Among  these,  when  there  was  nothing  but  a  fordable  river  to  cross,  slaves  would 
perpetually  escape  from  Texas  ;  and  where  would  be  the  remedy  ?  Are  the  United 
States  prepared  to  impose  by  a  treaty  on  Mexico,  where  slavery  is  unknown,  the  obli 
gation  to  surrender  fugitive  slaves  ? 

Mexico  is  greatly  the  weaker  power,  and  requires  a  boundary  which  will  give  her 
as  much  security  as  is  practicable.  It  is  not  required,  either  for  the  preservation  of 
peace,  or  for  any  other  legitimate  purpose,  that  the  United  States  should  occupy  a 
threatening  position.  It  cannot  be  rationally  supposed  that  Mexico  will  ever  make 
an  aggressive  war  against  them  ;  and  even  in  such  case,  the  desert  would  protect 


11 

them  against  an  invasion.  If  a  war  should  ever  again  take  place  between  the  two 
countries,  the  overwhelming  superiority  of  the  Navy  of  the  United  States  will  enable 
them  to  carry  on  their  operations  wherever  they  please.  They  would,  within  a  month, 
re-occupy  the  left  bank  of  the  Rio  .Norte,  and  within  a  short  time,  effect  a  landing 
and  carry  the  war  to  any  quarter  they  pleased. 

Must  the  war  be  still  prosecuted  fer  an  object  of  no  intrinsic  value,  to  which  the 
United  States  have  no  legitimate  right,  which  justice  requires  them  to  yield,  and 
which  even  expediency  does  not  require  ? 

VI. — Recapitulation. 

It  is  an  indisputable  fact,  that  the  annexation  of  Texas,  then  at  war  with  Mexico, 
was  tantamount  to  a  declaration  of  war,  and  that  the  comparative  weakness  of  Mex 
ico  alone  prevented  its  Government  from  considering  it  as  such. 

Uader  these  circumstances,  it  was  evidently  the  duty  of  the  United  States  to  use 
every  means  to  soothe  and  conciliate  the  Mexicans,  and  to  wait  with  patience  for  an 
unconditional  recognition  of  the  independence  of  Texas,  till  the  feelings  excited  by 
our  aggression  had  subsided. 

It  has  been  shown  that  after  Mexico  had  resorted,  as  a  substitute  for  war,  to  the 
harmless  suspension  of  the  ordinary  diplomatic  inter  course,  the  attempt  to  make  it  re 
tract  that  measure,  before  any  negotiations  for  the  restoration  of  harmony  between 
the  two  countries  should  be  entered  into,  was  neither  countenanced  by  the  acknowl 
edged  law  of  nations,  nor  necessary  for  any  useful  purpose,  nor  consistent  with  a 
proper  and  just  sense»of  the  relative  position  in  which  the  aggressive  measure  of  the 
United  States  had  placed  the  two  countries.  But  that  the  refusal  of  Mexico  to  sub 
mit  to  that  additional  contumely,  should  have  been  considered  as  an  insult  to  the 
United  States,  betrays  the  pride  of  power,  rather  than  a  just  sense  of  what  is  due  to 
the  true  dignity  and  honor  of  this  nation. 

It  has  been  Demonstrated  that  the  republic  of  Texas  had  not  a  shadow  of  right  to 
the  territory  adjacent  to  the  left  bank  of  the  lower  portion  of  the  Rio  Norte  ;  that  though 
she  claimed,  she  never  had  actually  exercised  jurisdiction  over  any  portion  of  it ;  that  the 
Mexicans  were  the  sole  inhabitants,  and  in  actual  possession  of  that  district ;  'that 
therefore  its  forcible  occupation  by  the  army  of  the  United  States  was,  according  to 
the  acknowledged  law  of  nations,  as  well  as  in  fact,  an  act  of  open  hostility  and  war  ; 
that  the  resistance  of  the  Mexicans  to  that  invasion  was  legitimate  ;  and  that  there 
fore  the  war  was  unprovoked  by  them,  and  commenced  by  the  United  States. 
l^'If  any  doubt  should  remain  of  the  correctness  of  these  statements,  let  them  be 
tested  by  the  divine  and  undeniable  precept,  "  Do  unto  others  as  you  would  be 
done  by." 

If  at  this  moment  France  was  to  contract  a  treaty  of  defensive  and  offensive  alli 
ance  with  Mexico,  a  treaty  taking  effect  immediately,  and  pending  the  war  between 
the  United  States  and  Mexico,  and  binding  herself  to^  defend  it  with  all  her  forces 
against  any  and  every  other  Power,  would  not'the  United  States  at  once  consider  such 
a  treaty  as  a  declaration  of  war  against  them  ? 

If,  in  lieu  of  declaring  war  against  Great  Britain,  in  the  year  1812,  the  United 
States  had  only  suspended  the  ordinary  diplomatic  relations  between  the  two  coun 
tries  ;  and  Great  Britain  had  declared  that  she  would  not  enter  in.to  any  -negotiation 
for  the  settlement  of  all  the  subjects  of  difference  between  the  two  countries,  unless 
the  United  States  should,  as  a  preliminary  condition,  restore  those  relations  ;  would 
not  this  have  been  considered  as  a  most  insolent  demand,  and  to  which  the  United 
States  never  would  submit  ? 

If  the  United  States  were,  and  had  been  for  more  than  a  century,  in  possession  of 
a  tract  of  country,  exclusively  inhabited  and  governed  by  them,  disturbed  only  by 
the  occasioual  forays  of  an  enemy  *  would  they  not  consider  the  forcible  military  in 
vasion  and  occupation  of  such  a  district  by  a  third  Power,  as  open  and  unprovoked 
war,  commenced  against  them  ?  And  could  their  resistance  to  the  invasion  render 
them  liable  to  the  imputation  of  having  themselves  commenced  the  war  ? 

Yet  it  would  seem  as  if  the  splendid  and  almost  romantic  successes  of  the  Ameri 
can  arms  had,  for  a  while,  made  the  people  of  the  United  States  deaf  to  any  other 
consideration  than  an  enthusiastic  and  exclusive  love  of  military  glory ;  as  if,  for 
getting  the  origin  of  the  war,  and  with  an  entire  disregard  for  the  dictates  of  justice, 


12 

they  thought  that  those  successes  gave  the  nation  a  right  to  dismember  Mexico,  and 
to  appropriate  to  themselves  that  which  did  not  belong  to  them. 

But  I  do  not  despair,  for  I  have  faith  in  our  institutions  and  in  the  people  ;  and  I 
will  now  ask  them  whether  this  was  their  mission  ?  and  whether  they  were  placed  by 
Providence  on  this  continent  for  the  purpose  of  cultivating  false  glory,  and  of  sink 
ing  to  the  level  of  those  vulgar  conquerors  who  have  at  all  times  desolated  the  earth. 

VII. — The  Mission  of  the  United  States. 

The  people  of  the  United  States  have  been  placed  by  Providence  in  a  position 
never  before  enjoyed  by  any  other  nation.  They  are  possessed  of  a  most  extensive 
territory,  with  a  very  fertile  soil,  a  variety  of  climates  and  productions,  and  a  capacity 
of  sustaining  a  population  greater^  in  proportion  to  its  extent,  than  any  other  terri 
tory  of  the  same  size  on  the  face  of  the  globe. 

By  a  concourse  of  various  circumstances,  they  found  themselves,  at  the  epoch  of 
their  independence,  in  the  full  enjoyment  of  religious,  civil,  and  political  liberty,  en 
tirely  free  from  any  hereditary  monopoly  of  wealth  or  power.  The  people  at  large 
were  in  full  and  quiet  possession  of  all  those  natural  rights,  for  which  the  people  of 
other  countries  have  for  a  long  time  contended,  and  still  do  contend.  They  were, 
and  you  still  are,  the  supreme  sovereigns,  acknowledged  as  such  by  all.  For  the 
proper  exercise  of  these  uncontrolled  powers  and  privileges,  you  are  responsible  to 
posterity,  to  the  world  at  large,  and  to  the  Almighty  Being  who  has  poured  on  you 
such  unparalleled  blessings. 

Your  mission  is,  to  improve  the  state  of  the  world,  to  be  the."  Model  Republic," 
to  show  that  men  are  capable  of  governing  themselves,  and  that  this  simple  and  natu 
ral  form  of  government  is  that  also  which  confers  most  happiness  on  all,  is  productive 
of  the  greatest  development  of  the  intellectual  faculties,  above  all,  that  which  is  at 
tended  with  the  highest  standard  of  p  ivate  and  political  virtue  and  morality. 

Your  forefathers,  the  founders  of  the  Republic,  imbued  with  a  deep  feeling  of  their 
rights  and  duties,  did  not  deviate  from  those  principles.  The  sound  sense,  the  wis 
dom,  the  probity,  the  respect  for  public  faith,  with  which  the  internal  concerns  of  the 
nation  were  managed,  made  our  institutions  an  object  of  general  admiration.  Here, 
for  the  first  time,  was  the  experiment  attempted  with  any  prospect  of  success,  and  on 
a  large  scale,  of  a  Representative  Democratic  Republic.  If  it  failed,  the  last  hope 
of  the  friends  of  mankind  was  lost,  or  indefinitely  postponed  ;  and  the  eyes  of  the 
world  were  turned  towards  you.  Whenever  real,  or  pretended  apprehensions  of  the 
imminent  danger  of  trusting  the  people  at  large  with  power,  were  expressed,  the  an 
swer  ever  was,  4i  Look  at  America  !" 

In  their  external  relations  the  United  States,  before  this  unfortunate  war,  had, 
whilst  sustaining  their  just  rights,  ever  acted  in  strict  conformity  with  the  dictates  of 
justice,  and  displayed  the  utmost  moderation.  They  never  had  voluntarily  injured 
any  other  nation.  Every  acquisition  of  territory  from  Foreign  Powers  was  honestly 
made,  the  result  of  Treaties,  not  imposed,  but  freely  assented  to  by  the  other  party. 
The  preservation  of  peace  was  ever  a  primary  object.  The  recourse  to  arms  was  al 
ways  in  self-defence.  On  its  expediency  there  may  have  bsen  a  difference  of  opinion. 
That,  in  the  only  two-fnstances  of  conflict  with  civilized  nations  which  occurred  during 
a  period  o£  sixty -three  years,  (1783  to  1846,)  the  just  rights  of  the  United  States 
had  boon  invaded  by  a  long  continued  series  of  aggressions,  is  undeniable.  In  the 
first  instance,  war  was  not  declared  ;  and  there  were  only  partial  hostilities  between 
France  and  England.  The  Congress  of  the  United  States,  the  only  legitimate  organ 
of  the  nation  for  that  purpose,  did,  in  1812,  declare  war  against  Great  Britain.  In 
dependent  of  depredations  on  our  commerce,  she  had,  for  twenty  years,  carried  on 
an  actual  war  against  the  United  States.  I  say,  actual  war,  since  there  is  now  but 
one  opinion  on  that  subject ;  a  renewal  of  the  impressment  of  men  sailing  under  the 
protection  of  our  flag  would  be  tantamount  to  a  declaration  of  war.  The  partial  op 
position  to  the  war  of  1812,  did  not  rest  on  a  denial  of  the  aggressions  of  England 
and  of  the  justice  of  our  cause,  but  on  the  fact  that,  with  the  exception  of  impress 
ments,  similar  infractions  of  our  just  rights  had  been  committed  by  France,  and  on 
the  most  erroneous  belief,  that  the  administration  was  partial  to  that  country,  and  in 
sincere  in  their  apparent  efforts  to  restore  peace. 

At  present,  all  these  principles  would  seem  to  have  been  abandoned.     The  most 


13 

just,  a  purely  defensive  war — and  no  other  is  justifiable— is  necessarily  attended  with  a 
train  of  great  and   unavoidable    evils.      What   shall  we  say  of  one,  iniquitous  in  its 
origin,   and  provoked   by   ourselves   of  a  war  of  aggression,  which   is  now   publicly    / 
avowed  to  be  one  of  intended  conquest  ? 

If  persisted  in,  its  necessary  consequences  will  be,  a  permanent  increase  of  our 
military  establishment  and  of  executive  patronage  ;  its  general  tendency,  to  make 
man  hate  man,  to  awaken  his  worst  passions,  to  accustom  him  to  the  taste  of  blood. 
It  has  already  demoralized  no  inconsiderable  portion  of  the  nation. 

The  general  peace,  which  has  been  preserved  between  the  great  European  powers 
during  the  last  thirty  years,  may  not  be  ascribed  to  the  purest  motives.  Be  these 
what  they  may,  this  long  and  unusual  repose  has  been  most  beneficial  to  the  cause  of 
humanity.  Nothing  can  be  more  injurious  to  it,  more  lamentable,  more  scandalous^ 
than  the  war  between  two  adjacent  republics  of  North  America. 

Your  mission  was,  to  be  a  model  for  all  other  governments  and  for  all  other  less 
favored  nations,  to  adhere  to  the  most  elevated  principles  of  political  morality,  to  ap 
ply  all  your  faculties  to  the  gradual  improvement  of  your  own  institutions  and  social 
state,  and,  by  your  example,  to  exert  a  moral  influence  most  beneficial  to  mankind  at 
large.  Instead  of  this,  an  appeal  has  been  made  to  your  worst  passions  ;  to  cupidity, 
rto  the  thirst  of  unjust  aggrandizement  by  brutal  force  ;  to  the  love  of  military  fame 
and  of  false  glory  ;  and  it  has  even  been  tried  to  pervert  the  noblest  feelings  of  your 
nature.  The  attempt  is  made  to  make  you  abandon  the  lofty  position  which  your  fa 
thers  occupied,  to  substitute  for  it  the  political  morality  and  heathen  patriotism  of  the 
heroes  and  statesmen  of  antiquity. 

I  have  said,  that  it  was  attempted  to  pervert  even  your  virtues.  Devotedness  to 
country,  or  patriotism,  is  a  most  essential  virtue,  since  the  national  existence  of  any 
society  depends  upon  it.  Unfortunately,  our  most  virtuous  dispositions  are  perverted, 
not  only  by  our  vices  and  selfishness,  but  also  by  their  own  excess.  Even  the  most 
holy  of  our  attributes,  the  religious  feeling,  may  be  perverted  from  that  cause,  as  was 
but  too  lamentably  exhibited  in  the  persecutions,  even  unto  death,  of  those  who  were 
deemed  heretics.  It  is  not,  therefore,  astonishing,  that  patriotism,  carried  to  excess, 
should  also  be  perverted.  In  the  entire  devotedness  to  their  country,  the  people, 
everywhere  and  at  all  times,  have  been  too  apt  to  forget  the  duties  imposed  upon  them 
by  justice  towards  other  nations.  It  is  against  this  natural  propensity  that  you  should 
be  specially  on  your  guard.  The  blame  does  not  attach  to  those  who,  led  by  their 
patriotic  feelings,  though  erroneous,  flock  around  the  national  standard.  On  the  con 
trary,  no  nun  are  more  worthy  of  admiration,  or  better  entitled  to  the  thanks  of  their 
country,  than  those  who,  after  war  has  once  taken  place,  actuated  only  by  the  purest 
motives,  daily  and  with  the  utmost  self-devotedness,  brave  death  and  stake  their  own 
lives  in  the  conflict  against  the  actual  enemy.  I  must  confess,  that  I  do  not  extend 
the  same  charity  to  those  civilians,  who  coolly  and  deliberately  plunge  the  country 
into  any  unjust  or  unnecessary  war. 

We  should  have  but  one  conscience  ;  and  most  happy  would  it  be  for  mankind, 
were  statesmen  and  politicians  only  as  honest,  in  their  management  of  the  internal  or 
exteinal  national  concerns,  as  they  are  in  private  life.  The  irreproachable  private 
character  of  the  President,  and  of  all  the  members  of  his  administration,  is  known 
and  respected.  There  is  not  one  of  them  who  would  not  spurn  witn  indignation  the 
most  remote  hint  that,  on  similar  pretences  to  those  alleged  for  dismembering  Mex 
ico,  he  might  be  capable  of  an  attempt  to  appropriate  to  himself  his  neighbor  s  farm.  » 

In  the  total  absence  of  any  argument  that  can  justify  the  war  in  which  we  are  now 
involved,  resort  has  been  had  to  a  most  extraordinary  assertion.  It  is  said,  that  the 
people  of  the  United  States  have  an  hereditary  superiority  of  race  over  the  Mexi 
cans,  which  gives  them  the  right  to  subjugate  and  keep  in  bondage  the  inferior  nation. 
This,  it  is  also  alleged,  will  be  the  means  of  enlightening  the  degraded  Mexicans, 
of  improving  their  social  state,  and  of  ultimately  increasing  the  happiness  of  the  masses. 
Is  it  compatible  with  the  principle  of  Democracy,  which  rejects  every  hereditary 
claim  of  individuals,  to  admit  an  hereditary  superiority  of  races?  You  very  properly 
deny,  that  the  son  can,  independent  of  his  own  merit,  derive  any  right  or  privilege 
wfiatevor,froiii  tho  merit  or  any  other  social  superiority  of  his  father.*  Can  you  for  a 
moment  suppose,  tlfat  a  very  doubtful  descent  from  men,  who  lived  ona  thousand  years 
ago,  has  transmitted  to  you  a  superiority  over  your  fellow-men?  But  tho  Anglo- 


14 

Saxons  were  inferior  to  the  Goths,  from  whom  the  Spaniards  claim  to  be  descended  ; 
and  they  were  in  no  respect  superior  to  the  -Franks  and  to  the  Burgundians.  It  is  not 
to  their  Anglo-Saxon  descent,  but  to  a  variety  of  causes,  amongwhich  the  subsequent 
mixture  of  Frenchified  Normans,  Angevins  and  Gascons  must  not  be  forgotten,  that 
the  English  are  indebted  for  their  superior  institutions.  In  the  progressive  improve 
ment  of  mankind,  much  more  has  been  due  to  religious  and  political  institutions, 
than  to  races.  Whenever  the  European  nations,  which,  from  their  language,  are  pre 
sumed  to  belong  to  the  Latin  or  to  the  Sclavonian  race,  shall  have  conquered  institu 
tions  similar  to  those  of  England,  there  will  be  no  trace  left  of  the  pretended  superi 
ority  of  one  of  those  races  above  the  other.  At  this  time,  the  claim  is  but  a  pretext 
for  covering  and  justifying  unjust  usurpation  and  unbounded  ambition. 
.  But  admitting,  with  respect  to  Mexico,  the  superiority  of  race,  this  confers  no  su 
periority  of  rights.  Among  ourselves,  the  most  ignorant,  the  most  inferior,  either  in 
physical  or  mental  faculties,  is  recognized  as  having  equal  rights,  and  he  has  an  equal 
vote  with  any  one,  however  superior  to  him  in  all  those  respects.  This  is  founded  on 
the  immutable  principle  that  no  one  man  is  born  with  the  right  of  governing  another 
man.  He  may,  indeed,  acquire  a  moral  influence  over  others,  and  no  other  is  legiti 
mate.  The  same  principle  will  apply  to  nations.  However  superior  the  Anglo- 
American  race  may  be  to  that  of  Mexico,  this  gives  the  Americans  no  right  to  infringe 
upon  the  rights  of  the  inferior  race.  The  people  of  the  United  States  may  rightfully, 
and  will,  if  they  use  the  proper  means,  exercise  a  most  beneficial  moral  influence  over 
the  Mexicans,  and  other  less  enlightened  nations  of  America.  Beyond  this  they  have 
no  right  to  go. 

The  allegation  that  the  subjugation  of  Mexico  would  be  the  means  of  enlightening 
the  Mexicans,  of  improving  their  social  state,  and  of  increasing  their  happiness,  is 
but  the  shallow  attempt  to  disguise  unbounded  cupidity  and  ambition.  Truth  never 
was  or  can  be  propagated  by  fire  and  sword,  or  by  any  other  than  purely  moral 
means.  By  these,  and  by  these  alone,  the  Christian  religion  was  propagated,  and 
enabled,  in  less  than  three  hundred  years,  to  conquer  idolatry.  During  the  whole  of 
that  period,  Christianity  was  tainted  by  no  other  blood  than  that  of  its  martyrs. 

The  duties  of  the  people  of  the  United  States  towards  other  nations  are  obvious. 
Never  losing  sight  of  the  divine  precept,  "  Do  to  others  as  you  would  be  done  by," 
they  have  only  to  consult  their  own  conscience.  For  Our  benevolent  Creator  has  im 
planted  in  the  hearts  of  men  the  moral  sense  of  right  and  wrong,  and  that  sympathy 
for  other  men,  the  evidences  of  which  are  of  daily  occurrence. 

It  seems  unnecessary  to  add  anything  respecting  that  false  glory  which,  from  habit 
and  the  general  tenor  of  our  early  education,  we  are  taught  to  admire.  The  task  has 
already  been  repeatedly  performed,  in  a  far  more  able  and  impressive  manner,  than 
anything  I  could  say  on  the  subject.  It  is  sufficient  to  say  that,  at  this  time,  neither 
the  dignity  nor  honor  of  the  nation  demand  a  further  sacrifice  of  invaluable  lives,  or 
even  of  money.  The  very  reverse  is  the  case.  The  true  honor  and  dignity  of  the 
nation  are  inseparable  from  justice.  Pride  and  vanity  alone  demand  the  sacrifice. 
Though  so  dearly  purchased,  the  astonishing  successes  of  the  American  arms  have  at 
least  put  it  in  the  power  of  the  United  States  to  grant  any  terms  of  peace,  without 
incurring  'the  imputation  of  being  actuated  by  any  but  the  most  elevated  motives.  It 
would  seem  that  the  most  proud  and  vain  must  be  satiated  with  glory,  and  that  the 
most  reckless  and  bellicose  should  be  sufficiently  glutted  with  human  gore. 

A  more  truly  glorious  termination  of  the  war,  a  more  splendid  spectacle,  an  example 
more  highly  useful  to  mankind  at  large,  cannot  well  be  conceived,  than  that  of  the 
victorious  forces  of  the  United  States  voluntarily  abandoning  all  their  conquests, 
without  requiring  anything  else  than  that  which  was  strictly  due  to  our  citizens. 

VIII. — Terms  of  Peace. 

I  have  said  that  the  unfounde declaim  of  Texas  to  the  territory  between  the  Nueces 
and  the  Rio  Norte,  was  the  greatest  impediment  to  peace.  Of  this  there  can  be  no 
doubt.  For  if,  relinquishing  the  spirit  of  military  conquest,  nothing  shall  be  required 
but  the  indemnities  due  to  our  citizens,  the  United  States  have  only  to  accept  the 
terms  which  have  been  offered  by  the  Mexican  Government.  It  consents  to  yield  a 
territory  five  degrees  of  latitude,  or  near  350  miles,  in  breadth,  and  extending  from 
New  Mexico  to  the  Pacific.  Although  the  greater  part  of  this  is  quite  worthless,  yet 


15 

the  portion  of  California  lying  between  the  Sierra  Neveda  and  the  Pacific,  and  in 
cluding  the  port  of  San  Francisco,  is  certainly  worth  much  more  than  the  amount  of 
indemnities  justly  due  to  our  citizens.  It  is  only  in  order  to  satisfy  those  claims,  that 
an  accession  of  territory  may  become  necessary. 

It  is  notbelieved  that  the  Executive  will  favor  the  wild  suggestions  of  a  subjugation, 
or  annexation  of  the  whole  of  Mexico,  or  of  any  of  its  interior  provinces.  And,  if  I 
understand  the  terms  offered  by  Mr.  Trist,  there  was  no  intention  to  include  within 
the  cessions  required,  the  Province  of  New  Mexico.  But  the  demand  of  both  Old 
and  New  California,  or  of  a  sea-coast  of  more  than  thirteen  hundred  miles  in  length 
(lat.  23°  to  42°),  is  extravagant  and  unnecessary.  The  Peninsula  is  altogether 
worthless,  and  there  is  nothing  worth  contending  for  south  of  San  Diego,  or  about 
lat.  32°. 

In  saying  that,  if  conquest  is  not  the  object  of  the  war,  and  if  the  pretended  claim 
of  Texas  to  the  Rio  del  Norte  shall  be  abandoned,  there  cannot  be  any  insuperable 
obstacle  to  the  restoration  of  peace,  it  is  by  no  means  intended  to  assert  that  the 
terms  heretofore  proposed  by  either  party  are  at  this  time  proper.  And  I  apprehend 
that  the  different  views  of  the  subject  entertained  by  those  who  sincerely  desire  a 
speedy  and*  just  peace,  may  create  some  difficulty.  There  are  some  important  con 
siderations  which  may  become  the  subject  of  subsequent  arrangements.  For  the 
present,  nothing  more  is  strictly  required  than  to  adopt  the  principle  of  status  ante 
bellum,  or,  in  other  words,  to  evacuate  the  Mexican  territory,  and  to  provide  for  the 
payment  of  the  indemnities  due  to  our  citizens.  The  scruples  of  those  who  object  to 
any  cession  whatever  of  territory,  except  on  terms  unacceptable  to  the  Southern 
States,  might  be  removed  by  a  provision,  that  would  only  pledge  a  territory  sufficient 
for  the  purpose,  and  leave  it  in  the  possession  of  the  United  States  until  the  indemni 
ties  had  been  fully  paid. 

Was  I  to  listen  exclusively  to  my  own  feelings  and  opinions,  I  would  say,  that,  if 
the  propositions  which  I  have  attempted  to  establish  are  correct ;  if  I  am  not  mis 
taken  in  my  sincere  conviction,  that  the  war  was  unprovoked  by  the  Mexicans,  and 
has  been  one  of  iniquitous  aggression  on  our  part ;  it  necessarily  follows  that,  accord 
ing  to  the  dictates  of  justice,  the  United  States  are  bound  to  indemnify  them,  for 
having  invaded  their  territory,  bombarded  their  towns,  and  inflicted  all  the  miseries 
of  war  on  a  people,  who  were  jighting  in  defence  of  their  own  homes.  If  all  this  be 
true,  the  United  States  would  give  but  an  inadequate  compensation  for  the  injuries 
they  have  inflicted,  by  assuming  the  payment  of  the  indemnities  justly  due  to  their  own 
citizens. 

Even  if  a  fair  purchase  of  territory  should  be  convenient  to  both  parties,  it  would 
be  far  preferable  to  postpone  it  for  the  present,  among  other  reasons,  in  order  that  'it 
should  not  have  the  appearance  of  being  imposed  on  Mexico.  There  are  also  some 
important  considerations,  to  which  it  may  not  be  improper  to  call  at  this  time  the 
public  attention. 

Our  population  may  at  this  time  be  assumed,  as  amounting  to  twenty  millions.  Al 
though  the  ratio  of  natural  increase  has  already  been  lessened,  from  thirty-three  to 
about  thirty  per  cent,  in  ten  years,  the  deficiency  has  been,  and  will  probably  cont 
inue,  for  a  while,  to  be  compensated  by  the  prodigious  increase  of  immigration  from 
foreign  countries.  An  increase  of  thirty  per  cent,  would  add  to  our  population  six 
millions,  within  ten,  and  near  fourteen  millions  in  twenty  years.  At  the  rate  of  only 
twenty-five  per  cent,  it  will  add  five  millions,  in  ten,  and  more  than  eleven  millions  in 
twenty  years.  That  the  fertile  uncultivated  land,  within  the  limits  of  the  States  ad 
mitted,  or  immediately  admissible  in  the  Union,  could  sustain  three  times  that  num 
ber,  is  indubitable.  But  the  indomitable  energy,  the  locomotive  propensities,  and  all 
the  habits  of  the  settlers  of  riew  countries  are  such,  that,  not  even  the  united  efforts 
of  both  Governments  can  or  will  prevent  their  occupying  within  twenty,  if  not  within 
ten  years,  every  district,  as  far  as  the  Pacific,  and  whether  within  the  limits  of  the 
United  States  or  of  Mexico,  which  shall  not  have  previously  been  actually  and  bona 
fide  occupied  and  settled  by  others.  It  may  be  said  that  this  is  justifiable  by  Natural 
Law  ;  that,  for  the  same  reason  which  sets  aside  the  right  of  discovery,  if  not  followed 
by  actual  occupation  within  a  reasonable  time,  the  rights  of  Spain  and  Mexico  have 
been  forfeited  by  their  neglect,  or  inability,  during  a  period  of  three  hundred  years, 
to  colonize  a  country,  which,  during  the  whole  of  that  period,  they  held  undisputed 


16 

atty  other  foreign  nation.  And  it  may  perhaps  be  observed  that,  had  the  Govern 
ment  of  the  United  States  waited  for  the  operation  of  natural  and  irresistible  causes, 
these  alone  would  have  given  them,  without  a  war,  more  than  they  want  at  this 
moment. 

However  plausible  all  this  may  appear,  it  is  nevertheless  certain,  that  it  will  be  an 
acquisition  of  territory  for  the  benefit  of  the  people  of  the  United  States,  and  in  vio 
lation  of  solemn  treaties.  Not  only  collisions  must  be  avoided,  and  the  renewal  of 
another  illicit  annexation  be  prevented  ;  but  the  two  countries  must  coolly  consider 
their  relative  position;  and  whatever  portion  of  territory,  not  actually  settled  by  the 
Mexicans,  and  of  no  real  utility  to  them,  they  may  be  disposed  to  cede,  must  bo  ac 
quired  by  a  treaty  freely  assented  to,  and  for  a  reasonable  compensation.  But  this  is 
not  the  time  for  the  discussion  of  a  proper  final  arrangement.  We  must  wait  till 
peace  shall  have  been  restored,  and  angry  feelings  shall  have  subsided.  At  present 
the  only  object  is  Peace,  immediate  peace,  a  just  peace,  and  no  acquisition  of  terri 
tory,  but  that  which  may  be  absolutely  necessary  for  effecting  the  great  object  in  view. 
The  most  simple  terms,  those  which  will  only  provide  for  the  adjustment  of  the  Texan 
boundary  and  for  the  payment  of  the  indemnities  due  to  our  citizens,  and,  in  every 
other  respect,  restore  things  as  they  stood  before  the  beginning  of  hostilities,  appear 
to  me  the  most  eligible.  For  that  purpose  I  may  be  permitted  to  wish,  that  the  dis 
cussion  of  the  terms  should  not  be  embarrassed  by  the  introduction  of  any  other  mat 
ter.  There  are  other  considerations,  highly  important,  and  not  foreign  to  the  great 
question  of  an  extension  of  territory,  but  which  may,  without  any  inconvenience  or 
commitment,  be  postponed,  and  should  not  be  permitted  to  impede  the  immediate 
termination  of  this  lamentable  war. 

I  have  gone  farther  than  I  intended.  It  is  said  that  a  rallying  point  is  wanted  by 
the  friends  of  peace.  Let  them  unite,  boldly  express  their  opinions,  and  use  their 
utmost  endeavors  in  promoting  an  immediate  termination  of  the  war.  For  the 
people,  no  other  banner  is  necessary.  But  their  representatives  in  Congress 
assembled  are  alone  competent  to  ascertain,  alone  vested  with  the  legitimate  power 
of  deciding,  what  course  should  be  pursued  at  this  momentous  crisis,  what  are  the  best 
means  for  carrying  into  effect  thoir  own  views,  whatever  these  may  be.  We  may  wait 
with  hope  and  confidence  the  result  of  their  deliberations. 


I  have  tried,  in  this  essay,  to  confine  myself  to  the  questions  at  issue  between  the 
United  States  and  Mexico.  Whether  the  Executive  has,  in  any  respect,  exceeded 
his  legitimate  powers;  whether  he  is,  for  any  of  his  acts,  liable  to  animadversion,  are 
questions  which  do  not  concern  Mexico. 

There  are  certainly  some  doubtful  assumptions  of  power,  and  some  points  on  wliich 
explanations  are  necessary.  The  most  important  is  the  reason,  which  may  have  in 
duced  the  President,  when  he  considered  the  war  as  necessary  and  almost  unavoidable^ 
not  to  communicate  to  Congress,  which  was  all  that  time  in  session,  the  important 
steps  he  had  taken,  till  after  hostilities,  and  indeed  actual  war,  had  taken  place.  The 
Substitution,  for  war  contributions,  of  an  arbitrary  and  varying  tariff,  appears  to  me  to 
be  of  a  doubtful  nature;  and  it  is  hoped,  that  the  subject  will  attract  the  early  atten 
tion  of  Congress.  I  am  also.clcarly  of  opinion,  that  the  provisions  of  the  law  respecting 
volunteers,  which  authorizes  them  to  elect  their  officers,  is  a  direct  violation  of  the 
constitution  of  the  United  States,  which  recognizes  no  other  land  fo,rce  than  the  army 
and  mil  tia,  and  which  vests  in  the  President  and  Senate  the  exclusive  power  of  ap 
pointing  all  tho  officers  of  the  United  States,  whose  appointments'are  not  othorwi.se 
provided  for  in  the  constitution  itself.  (With  respect  4o  precedents,  refer  to  the  act 
of  July  6th,  1812,  chap.  4(51,  (cxxxviii.)  enacted  with  due  deliberation,  and  which 
repeals,  in  that  respect,  the  act  on  same  subject  of  February  Gth,  1812.) 


NOTES. 

(A  )  Indemnities. 

PAGE  2,  LASrt  PARAGRAPH.  Mr.  Waddy  Thompson,  Minister  of  tho  U.  S.  at  Mexico,  in  the 
years  1842,  1843,  says,  that 

"By  the  Convention  of  1839,  the  Mexican  Governmer!  had  the  alternative  of  paying  the 
awards  either  in  coin,  or  in  their  own  Treasury  Notes,  at  tiicir  option.  The  market  was  already 
flooded  with  this  depreciated  Government  paper,  and  new  emissions  were  daily  made.  The 
market  value  of  these  Treasury  Notes  was  about  thirfey  cents  on  the  dollar,  and  if  this  additional 
two  millions  had  been  thrown  on  the  market,  they  would  have  depreciated  still  more.  The 
owners  of  these  claims  knew  this,  and^  were  anxious  to  make  some  other  arrangement.  The 
awards  were  not  sent  to  me  until  October.  I  demanded  the  money  ;  but  it  was  a  mere  form, 
for  every  ono  know  that  the  Government  neither  had  the  money  nor  the  means  of  raising  it,  and 
coercion  was  out  of  the  question,  as  they  would  have  availed  themselves  of  the  alternative  of  the 
treaty  and  given  the  Treasury  Notes,  which  would  only  have  been  changing  the  evidence  of  the 
debt  and  to  a  less  advantageous  form  In  a  week,  however,  I  made  a  new  convention  with  the 
Government." 

By  this  convention,  dated  Jan.  30,  1843,  Mexico  agreed  to  pay  the  liquidated  debt  in  coin,  paying 
the  interest  up  to  tho  30th  of  April,  1843,  and  the  principal  and  interest  in  five  years  from  that 
date  in  tri-monthly  instalments.  This  important  fact,  the  good  faith  of  the  Mexican  Government 
in  not  availing  itself  of  the  right  which  it  had  by  the  Convention  of  1839  to  pay  in  their  depreciated 
Treasury  Notes,  should  have  been  mentioned,  when  the  conduct  of  Mexico  with  respect  to  the 
indemnities  wtis  officially  stated  to  have  been  a  just  cause  for  war. 

With  respect  to  the  last  convention  of  20th  Nov.,  1843,  which  provided  for  the  settlement  of  the 
claims  on  which  no  final  decision  had  been  made  by  the  former  joint  commission.  Mr.  Thompson 
says  :  "  I  was  anxious  to  have  made  provision  for  the  settlement  of  these  cases  at  the  time  that  I 
negotiated  the  Convention  of  January,  1843,  but  my  Government  thought  otherwise.  In  November, 
however,  of  that  year,  I  received  instructions  to  negotiate  another  convention  for  the  settlement 

of  these  claims.  .  , I  succeeded,  but  with  difficulty,  in  obtaining  every 

concession  which  Iliad  been  instructed  to  ask,  and  on  some  points  more,  with  the  single  exception 
of  the  place  of  meeting  of  the  new  commission,  which  I  agreed  should  be  Mexico  instead  of 
Washington." 

The  Convention  itself,  which  the  Senate  refused  to  ratify  for  that  reason,  is  not  within  my  reach. 

(B.)     Treaty  of  Peace. 

PAGE  o,  2D  PARAGRAPH.  The  treaty  of  peace  of  1783  between  France  and  England,  alluded  to 
in  the  text,  is  that  of  the  Preliminaries  signed  on  the  20th  January,  1783,  negotiated  on  the  part  of 
Great  Britain  by  Mr.  Fitzherbert,  who  was  not  admitted  as  resident  Envoy  or  Minister.  These 
preliminary  articles  did  in  fact  put  an  end  to  the  war.  The  diplomatic  intercourse  was  immedi 
ately  restored  ;  and  the  definitive  treaty,  signed  on  the  3d  of  September  following  by  the  respective 
Ambassadors  of  the  two  Powers,  was  but  a  matter  of  form  ;  for  it  is  verbatim  and  without  a  single 
alteration,  the  transcript  of  the  Preliminary  Articles. 

(C.)     Forcible  Occupation  of  Litigated  Territory. 

PAGE  6,  LINE  32.  On  the  subject  of  the  military  occupation,  by  Gen.  Taylor,  in  obedience  to 
the  order  of  tho  President,  of  the  territory  adjacent  to  the  left  bank  of  the  Rio  dol  Norte,  1  said  in 
tho  text:  "I  do  aver,  without  fear  of  contradiction,  that  whenever  a  territory  claimed  by  two 
Powers  is,  and  has  been  for  a  length  of  time,  in  the  possession  of  one  of  them,  if  the  other  should 
invade  and  take  possession  of  it  by  military  force,  such  an  act  is  an  open  act  of  hostility,  accord 
ing  to  the  acknowledged  and  practical  law  of  nations.  In  this  case  the  law  of  nations  only 
recognizes  a  clear  and  positive  fact." 

I  did  not  state  any  precedent,  because,  on  this  subject,  we  need  not  recur  to  any  foreign  exam 
ple  :  we  have  one  at  home  which  is  conclusive,  and  which  should  have  been  stated  at  large,  instead 
of  only  alluding  to  it. 

The  claims  of  Great  Britain  to  a  certain  portion  of  territory,  lying,  according  to  the  Treaty  of 
1783,  within  the  limits  of  the  north  eastern  boundary  of  the  United  States,  were  altogether 
groundless  and  frivolous.  At  all  events,  such  was  the  unanimous  opinion  of  the  people  of  the 
•  United  States.  Every  public  man,  either  in  Maine,  or  hi  Congress,  who  ever  had  an  opportunity 
of  delivering  his  opinion,  expressed  his  intimate  conviction  of  the  absolute  and  exclusive  right  of 
the  United  States  to  the  litigated  territory.  I  am  not  aware  of  a  single  instance  of  a  citizen  of 
the  United  States  expressing  a  different  opinion. 

But  Great  Britain  was  in  actual  possession  of  a  considerable  portion  of  the  inhabited  part  of  the 
territory  claimed  by  her.  And  it  is  a  positive  fact,  known  to  everybody,  that  neither  Maine,  nor 
the  United  States,  ever  attempted  to  invade  or  forcibly  to  occupy  the  territory  thus  in  the  actual 
possession  of  Great  Britain.  It  was  well  known  and  understood,  that  such  an  attempt  would  have 
been  an  open  act  of  hostility,  tantamount  to  a  declaration  of  war.  And  when  difficulties  arose 
between  the  borderers  of  both  nations,  General  Scott  was  sent  by  tho  Government  of  the  United 
States,  in  order  to  mako  such  arrangements  with  the  local  authorities  of  Now  Brunswick,  as  might 
prevent  any  dangerous  collision.  It  is  well  known  that,  by  his  prudent  conduct,  he  succeeded  in 
accomplishing  the  object  of  his  mission,  and  was  considered  as  having  thus  rendered  an  eminent 
eervice  to  the  country. 


CATALOGUE  OF  VALUABLE  ENGLISH  WORKS, 


EN'S  Manual  of  Ancient  History,  partic- 
y  with  regard  to  the  Constitutions,  Com- 

je,  &c.»  of  the  States  of  Antiquity,  Svo. 

cloth.  $p5. 

HOMMAIRE  DE  HELL.  Travels  in  the  Steppes 
of  the  Caspian  Sea,  Southern  Russia,  and  the 
Crimea.  Translated  from  the  French.  Svo. 
1847.  $2  50. 

HUME'S  Private  Correspondence  with  Several 
Distinguished  Persons  in  17G1  to  1775.  4to. 
cloth.  $1  50. 

HUTCHINSOK'S  Treatise  on  the  Causes  and 
Principles  of  Meteorological  Phenomena;  also 
the  Essays.  Plates.  Svo.  cloth.  $2  25. 
KOHLRAUSCH'S  History  of  Germany,  from  the 
Earliest  Period  to  the  Presant  time.  Thick 
Svo.  $2  50. 

LANE  (Edward  William.)— An  Account  of  the 
Manners  and  Customs  of  the   Modern  Egyp 
tians.    Writen  in  Egypt,  during   the  Years 
1833,  '34,  and  '35.  2  vols.  Svo.  $'4. 
LIVES  OF  EMINENT  PERSON S.— Published 
by  the   Society  for   the    Diffusion  of  Useful 
Knowledge.  Svo.  cloth.  $2. 
McGILLIVlUY'S    History    of   British     Land 
Birds,    Indigenous  and  Migratory,  with  nu 
merous  cut;.  3  large  vols.  Svo.  $7  50. 
McCULLA<?il'S  Industrial  History  of  Free  Na 
tions  ;  considered  in  relation  to  their  Domestic 
Institutiois  and  External  Policy.    2  vols.  Svo. 
$5.  1846. 
MALCOLMS  Political  History  of  India,  from 

1784  to  183.  2  vols.  Svo.  cloth,  $4  50. 
MARTIN  (Montgomery.)     The  History,   Anti 
quities,  Tpography,  and  Statistics  of  Eastern 
India.    Wth  Maps  and  Plates.    3  vols.    Svo. 
$650. 

MARTIN'S  British  Colonial  Library.  Forming 
a  Popular  .nd  Authentic  Description  of  all  the 
Colonies  <f  the  British  Empire;  embracing 
their  History,  Physical  Geography,  Geology, 
Climate,  Mural  History,  Government,  Reli 
gion,  &c.  0  vols.  Post  Svo  cloth.  $7  50. 
MARLBOROJGH  DISPATCHES.  The  Let 
ters  and  lispatches  of  John  Churchill,  First 
Duke  of  Marlborough,  from  1702  to  1712. 
Edited  by  General  the  Right  Hon.  Sir  G. 
'  Murray.  Portrait.  3  vols.  thick  Svo.  $10. 

MARLBOROUGH  CORRESPONDENCE.  Pri 
vate  Coriespondence  of  Sarah,  Duchess  of 
Marlborough,  illustrative  of  the  Court  and 
Times  of  Queen  Anne.  2  vols.  8vo.  cloth. 
#5  75. 

MASSON'S  Narrative  of  various  Journeys  in 
Balochistan,  Afghanistan,  the  Punjab,  and  the 
Kalat.  Maps  and  Plates.  5  vols.  Svo.  $7. 

MEMOIRS  OF  PAUL  JONES.  The  Real  Life, 
from  his  Original  Journals.  Post  Svo.  cloth. 
#1  00. 

MICHELETS  History  of  France.  Translated 
by  W.  X.  Kelley.  2  vols.  Svo.  cloth.  #3  50. 

MILLENGEN'S  History  of  Duelling;  (includ 
ing  Narratives  of  the  "most  Remarkable  Per 
sonal  Encounters  that  have  taken  place.  2 
vols.  Svo.  $-3  25. 

MITFORD  (William.)  The  History  of  Greece  ; 
with  the  final  Additions  and  Corrections.  S 
vols.  Svo.  $10. 

NAPIER'S  Florentine  History,  from  the  Earli 
est  Authentic  Records  to  the    Accession  of 
nd  III.  G  vols.  post  Svo.  cloth.  $0. 
ON.     Evenings  with    Prince  Camba- 
By  Baron  Langon.    2  vols.  Svo.  cloth. 


NATURAL  PHILOSOPHY.  Published  by  the 
Society  for  the  Diffusion  of  Useful  Knowledge, 
containing  Objects,  Advantages,  and  Pleasure.-: 
of  Science ;  Mechanics;  Hydrostatics;  Hy 
draulics;  Pneumatics;  Heat;  Optics;  Dou 
ble  Refraction  ;  and  Polarisation  of  Light.  4 
vols.  Svo.  cloth.  $6  50. 

NUTT ALL'S  Classical  and  Archaeological  Dic 
tionary  of  Manners,  Customs,  Institutions. 
Sciences,  &c.,  of  Nations  of  Antiquity.  Svo. 
cloth.  $2. 

OLD  ENGLISH  DRAMATISTS.;  comprising 
Beaumont  and  Fletcher,  Shakspeare,  Ben 
Jonson,  Massinger,  Ford,  Wycherley,  Con- 
greve,  Yanbrugh,  and  Farquh?f.  G  vols.  Svo. 
$4  each. 

PENNY  MAGAZINE  (THE,)  of  the  Society 
for  the  Diffusion  of  Useful  Knowledge.  New 
Series,  comprising  IS-'l,  '2,  '3,  '4,  '5.  5  vols. 
$7  50. 

PERRING'S  Large  Views  and  Illustrations  oi 
the  Pyramids  of  Gizeh,  Abou  Roach,  and  to 
the  Southward,  &c.  With  Notes  and  Refer 
ences  to  Col.  Vyse's  Work  ;  Rosellini,  Belzo- 
ni,  Wilkinson,  Lane,  &c.  3  Nos.  elephant 
folio.  Published  at  £20.  $'15. 

QUINN'S  Historical  Atlas.  New  Edition,  with 
Maps  on  an  enlarged  scale  ;  by  W.  Hughes, 
Oblong  folio,  half  morocco.  $6. 

ROBERTS  (W.)  History  of  Letter-Writing, 
from  the  Earliest  Period  to  the  FifthCentury. 
1  vol.  Svo.  $3  TO. 

ROADS  AND  RAILROADS.  Vehicles  and 
Modes  of  Travelling.  12mo.  Cuts.  75  cents. 

SCHLOSSER'S  History  of  the  Eighteenth  Cen 
tury  ;  and  of  the  Nineteenth,  till  the  Over 
throw  of  the  French  Empire  ;  with  reference- 
to  Mental  Cultivation  and  Progress.  Trans 
lated  from  the  German.  With  Preface  and 
Notes  by  Davison.  G  vols.  Svo.  $15. 

SCOTT'S  Travels  in  Egypt  and  Candia.  Illus 
trated  with  Engravings.  2  vols.  Svo.  cloth 
$2  50. 

SHARP'S  History  of  Egypt,  from  the  Earliest 
Times  till  the  Conquest  by  the  Arabs,  A.D, 
640.  Thick  Svo.  cloth.  $2  50. 

SHIRLEY'S  Dramatic  Works  and  Poems;  with 
Notes  by  W.  Gifford  ;  and  an  Account  of  Shir 
ley's  Life  and  Writings,  and  additional  Notes 
by  A.  Dyce.  G  vols.  Svo.  cloth.  $10. 

SPROULE'S  Elements  of  Practical  Agriculture, 
comprehending  the  Nature,  Properties,  and 
Improvement  of  Soils  ;  Structure ;  Functions, 
and  Cultivation  of  Plants  ;  and  the  Husbandn 
of  the  Domestic  Animals  of  the  Farm.  Third 
edition  enlarged,  thick  Svo.  $2  50. 

STRUTT'S  Sports  and  Pastimes  of  the  PeopK- 
of  England;  including  their  Rural  and  Do 
mestic"  Recreations,  &c.  Illustrated  with  14(.> 
Engravings.  Imp.  Svo.  large  paper.  $3  50. 

TALES  FROM  THE  GERMAN.  Specimen* 
from  the  most  celebrated  Authors.  Translated 
by  Feiling.  Svo.  $1  75. 

THE  LATE  WAR  IN  INDIA;  Including  Des 
patches  from  the  Governor  General  and  Prin 
cipal  Officers.  Large  map,  plates.  Svo.  $1  50. 

WILSON'S  (W.  Rae)  Travels  in  Russia.  Illus 
trated.  2  vols.  Svo.  $2  25. 

WYSE'S  America;  Its  Realities  and  its  Re 
sources,  comprising  Important  Details  con 
nected  with  the  present  Social,  Political, 
Agricultural,  Commercial,  and  Financial -State, 
of  the  Country;  its  Laws  and  Customs,  &o. 
'J  Yols.  Svo,  cloth.  $4  50 


CATALOGUE  OF  VALUABLE  ENGLISH  WORKS. 


.NTIQUARIAN  REPERTORY.      A  Miscel 
lany   of    Topography,    History,    Biography, 

[  Customs,  &c. ;  illustrating  valuable  remains 
of  Olden  Times.  By  Grose  and  Astlo.  4  vols. 
royal  4to.  half  mor.  fine  copy— illustrated 
with  numerous  Views,  Portraits,  Monu 
ments,  &c.  1809.  $30. 

AGRIPPA'S  OCCULT  PHILOSOPHY  ;  trans- 
lated  from  the  Latin.  Small  4to.  very  rare. 
London,  1631.  $6. 

ADDISON'S  WORKS.  4  vols.  4to.  Barker- 
cille's  beautiful  edition^  calf.  Birmingham, 
1761.  $18. 

AULUS  GELLIUS.  The  Attic  Nights,  trans 
lated  by  Rev.  W.  Beioe.  3  vols.  Svo.  calf 
neat.  1795.  $6. 

JONES'  (Sm  WILLIAM)  WORKS,  with  the 
Life  of  the  Author,  by  Lord  Teignmouth.  13 
vols.  Svo.  calf  extra.  London,  1807.  $32. 

BRANDT,  (GERARD.)  The  History  of  the 
Reformation,  and  other  Ecclesiastical  Ti  ansac- 
tions  in  the  Low  Countries,  from  the  begin 
ning  of  the  Eighth  Century  to  the  Synod  of 
Dort.  Translated  from  the  Dutch.  4  vols. 
folio,  with  many  fine  portraits.  Calf.  Lou- 
don,  1720.  $45. 

BUTLER'S  HUDIBRAS  ;  with  Annotations  and 
a  Preface  by  Gray  ;  with  Plates.  2  vols.  Svo. 
half  calf.  London,  1799.  $6. 

BIBLIO THECA  SUSSEXIANA.  A  Descrip. 
tive  Catalogue,  with  Historical  and  Biograph 
ical  Notices  of  the  MSS.  and  Books  in  the 
Library  of  the  Duke  of  Sussex.  2  vols.  imp. 
Svo.  large  paper,  blue  calf.  London.  1827. 

t    $1600. 

BUFFON.  CEuvres  Complete,  par  le  Comte 
de  Lacepede.  The  best  edition  of  Buffon's 
Natural  History,  in  17  vols.  Svo  ;  with  many 
hundred  colored  plates.  Halfcf.  Paris,  1817. 

BAYLE'S  HISTORICAL  AND  CRITICAL 
DICTIONARY.  5  vols.  folio.  $40. 

THE  SAME.     Calf,  fine  copy,  1731.     $35. 

BURNEY'S  GENERAL  HISTORY  OF  MU 
SIC,  from  the  Earliest  Period  to  the  Present 
fime.  4  vols.  4to.  half  calf,  line  copy,  1789. 
$28  00. 

BRUCE'S  TRAVELS  TO  DISCOVER  THE 
SOURCE  OF  THE  NILE.  5  vols.  4to.  russia. 
London,  1790.  $21. 

BROWN  (THOMAS)  WORKS.  Serious  and 
Comical,  in  Prose  and  Verse.  4  vols.  12mo. 
with  plates;  fine  copy,  in  calf.  1720. 

BIBLIA  POLYGLOTTA  WALTON  I— Wal 
ton's  Polyglott  Bible,  in  Seven  Languages  ; 
with  Casteil's  Lexicon.  8  vols.  folio,  fine 
clean  copy  in  old  calf  binding.  London,  1657- 
58.  $170. 

CABINET  OF  POETRY;  containing  the  best 
entire  pieces  to  be  found  in  the  works  of  the 
British  Poets.  6  vols.  12mo.  calf  extra. 

CAMDEN'S  BRITANNIA:  A  Description  of 
E  :gland,  Scotland,  and  Ireland,  from  the 
Earliest  Antiquity.  A  new  edition,  enlarged 
by  Gough.  Illustrated  with  plates  and  maps. 
4  vols.  royal  folio,  calf.  London,  1800.  $45. 

CHARLEVOIX. — Histoire  et  Description  de  la 
Nouvelle  France.  6  vols.  12mo.  maps  and 
plates  ;  old  calf.  "  Paris,  1744.  $12  50. 

CLARKE'S  TRAVELS  IN  VARIOUS  COUN- 

'  TRIES  OF  EUROPE,  ASIA,  and  AFRICA. 
Maps  and  plates.  11  vols.  Svo.  calf.  London, 
1816.  $30. 

THE  SAME,  bound  in  cloth.    $20. 

OONGREVE'S  WORKS;  consisting  of  his 
Plays  and  Poems.  3  vols.  royal  Svo.  cf.  $17. 


DRAKE'S  SHAKSPEARE  AND  HIS  TI] 
A  Criticism  on  his  Genius  :  History  c 
Manners,  Customs,  Amusements,  Suj 
lions,  and  Literature  of  his  Age.  2- vols 
4to.  large  paper.  (Pub.  at  7  guineas.) 
London, 1817. 

GLANVILLE'S  FULL  AND  PLAIN 
DENCE  concerning  Witches  and  A 
tions.  Svo.  calf  neat.  1726.  $3  50. 

GRANGER'S  BIOGRAPHICAL  HIS' 
OF  ENGLAND  from  Egbert  the  Great 
Revolution.  4  vols.  royal  Svo.  calf  exti 
London,  1S04. 

GUZMAN     DE    ALFARACHE;     OR 
ROGUE.    Translated  from  the  Spanish 
eraar.  Folio,  splendid  copy  in  rusaia 
Oxford,  1630.      $7  50. 

GIRALDUS  CAMBRENSIS.    Tie  Itine 


Archbishop  Baldwin   through 


Vales, 


i ;  trar 
ols.  roj 
180G. 


year  1188.  By  Giraldus  de  Ba 
by  Sir  Richard  Cott  Hoare.  2 
half  calf,  many  plates.  London 

GIANNONi'S  HISTORY  OF  [HE  I 
DOM  OF  NAPLES.  Transited  frc 
Italian.  2  vols.  folio,  calf,  Lond./1729 

GIFFORD'S  HISTORY  OF  FRkNCE 
the  Earliest  Times.  5  vols.  4toj  calf, 
$14  00. 

GIBBON'S  MISCELLANEOUS  W3RK^ 
Memoirs  of  his  Life  and  Writing  :  vv 


casional  Notes,  &c.  By  John   Lo 
Portrait.  5  vols.  Svo.  half  calf,  $1 

HOLINSHED'S    CHRONICLES 
Scotland,  and  Ireland.    6  vols.  r 
set  in  russia.  London,  1S07.    $5 

HISTOIRE  GENEALOG1QUE  E 


Sh 

Er 

al  4! 
JO. 
HI 


D1QUE  des  Pairs  de  France,  de<pigr 
de  la  Couronne  et  des  Maisons  P 
1'Europe.     Par    le   Chevalier  di 
12  vols.  4 to.  half  calf.  Paris,  1S2'< 
HUMBOLDT'S  WORKS.     Person 


ncu 
Coi 

$4' 
Na 
nso 
the 


of  Travels  in  the  Equinoctial  Rjg 
rica.    7  vols.      Political  Essay  01 
dom   of    New   Spain.    4   vois. 
Researches   in  America.    2  vols.  —in 
vols.  Svo.  with  maps   and   plate: ;  be 
half  russia,  $40.  London,  1811—  J826. 

HUMBOLDT :  Observations  Astforio 
OperationsjTrigonometriques,  et  idlest 
rometriques.  2  vols.  folio,  clottt,  i 
Paris,  1810. 

KNOX'S  HISTORICAL  JOURNAL  01 
PAIGNS  IN  NORTH  AMERICA   i 
'58,  '59,  and  '60  ;  including  the  two 
Quebec.     2  vols.  4to.  calf,  fine  copy 
$12  00. 

KNOLLES'  TURKISH  HISTORY,  F 
Earliest  Period.  Continued  by  Sip:  I 
cant.  Sixth  ed.  with  numerous  For 
vols.  folio,  calf.  1687.  $15. 

KERR'S  GENERAL  HISTORY,  and 
tion  of  Voyages  and  Travels,— Arr 
systematic  order.  Maps  and  Charts 
18  vols.  Svo.  calf,  $35. 

LELAND'S  ITINERARY  :  Published 
Original  MS.  in  the  Bodleian  Lit 
Thomas  Hearne.  To  which  is  pre 
Leland's  Naenioe  upon  the  Death  of  Si 
Wyatt.  9  vols.  Svo.  calf,  $22  OJ. 
1719. 

MISCELLANEA  ANTIQUA  ANGL 
Or  a  select  Collection  of  Curious  Tra 
trative  of  the  History,  Literature, 
and  Biography  of  the  English  Natior 
extra,  $9.     London,  1816. 


RETURN     CIRCULATION  DEPARTMENT 

TO'  h      202  Main  Library 

LOAN  PERIOD  1 
HOME  USE 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

ALL  BOOKS  MAY  BE  RECALLED  AFTER  7  DAYS 

RENEWALS  AND  RECHARGES  MAY  BE  MADE  4  DAYS  PRIOR  TO  DUE  DATE. 
LOAN  PERIODS  ARE  1 -MONTH.  3-MONTHS.  AND  1-YEAR. 
RENEWALS.  CALL  (415)  


3405 


DUE  AS  STAMPED  BELOW 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA,  BERKELEY 
FORM  NO.  DD6,  60m,  1  /83         BERKELEY,  CA  94720 


(P)S 


U.C.  BERKELEY  LIBRARIES 


